



































































Qass 

Book 




















/ 


T H E 



/ f) * 

f l/v..; v. 


PHILOSOPHY OF LIFE. 


\ 


h 


B Y 

E. WINCHESTER LOVELAND. 

H 



BOSTON: 

BELA MARSH, 14 BROMFIELD STREET. 
NEW YORK: 

8. T. MUNSON, 5 GREAT JONES STREET. 

1 8 5 9. 


K\ 






Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1858, hy E. Winchester Loveland, 
in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts. 



fhfiSS Off TUfi 

JfranttUn printing f^ottse, 

Corner of Franklin & Hawley Sts., 

J&03T0N. 


Vvt. 


PREFACE. 


The design of the Philosophy of Life is to 
demonstrate that faith in love, is joy and 
liberty, that can not be interrupted; that 
faith in selfishness, is misery and bondage. 


e. w. L. 



































• 












































































































































































































CONTENTS 


PART I. 

ARTICLE. PAGE. 

I. Consciousness,. 1 

II. Locality, . .... 1 

IIL Infinity,. 2 

IV. Time,. 3 

V. Space,. 4 

VI. Changes,. 4 

VIL Cause and Effect,. 4 

VIIL Infinite Action,. 5 

IX. Love and Selfishness,. 6 

X. Faith,. 7 

XI. Selfishness,. 12 

XII. The Standard of Love. 112 

XIII. Illustrations,. 130 


PART II. 

I. The Gods,.. 155 

II. The God of Thanks or Gratitude,. 165 

III. The God of Religion,. 159 

IV. The God of Position,. 161 

V. The God of the Ills of Life,. 163 

VI. The God of Importance,. 161 

VII. The Proud God,. 167 

VIII. The God of Prayer,.. 169 



























VI 


s 

CONTENTS. 

ARTICLE. PAGE. 

IX. The Preferred God,. 171 

X. The God of Man,. 176 

XL The Infallible God,. 178 

XIL The Infinite God,. 181 

XIII. The Good God,. 183 

XIV. The Unknown God,. 186 

XV. The Superior God,. 188 

XVI. The God of Mercy,. 196 

XVII. The God of Action,. 198 

XVIH. The Judging God,. 199 

XIX. The God of Authority,. 205 

XX. The God of the Cost,. 215 

XXL God the Author,. 219 

XXII. The God of Fear,. 221 

XXIII. The God of Woman,. 223 

XXIV. The Appearing God,. 226 

XXV. The God of Deception,. 228 

XXVI. The Secret God,. 230 

XXVII. The Future God,.... 232 

XXVIII. The God of the Present Moment,. 234 

XXllX. The God of Truth,. 235 

XXX. The Sacred God,. 240 

XXXI. The God of Etiquette,... . 242 

XXXII. The God of Disappointment,. 244 

XXXIII. The God of Needs,. 245 

XXXIV. The God of Wonder,. 246 

XXXV. The God of Criticism,. 247 

XXXVI. The God of Repentance,. 249 

XXXVII. The God of Laughter,. 250 

XXXVIII. The God of Enjoyment,. 252 

XXXIX. The God of Influences,. 255 

XL. The God of Heaven,. 256 

XLI. The God of Labor,. 257 

XLII. The Despised God,. 260 

XLIII. The God of Conditions,. 261 

XLIV. The Teaching God,. 263 

XLV. The God of Evil,. 265 

XLVI. The God of Anger,. 267 

XLVII. The God of Reform or Progression,. 267 

XLVIII. The God of Praise,. 275 

XLIX. The Inferior God,. 278 

L. The God of Reputation,. 279 

LI. The God of Education,. 282 

LII. The Dependent God,. 284 

















































CONTENTS., . vii 

ARTICLE. PAGE. 

LIIL The God of Music,. 286 

LIV. The God of Spiritualism,.287 

LV. The God of Nature,.... 299 

LYI. The Legal God,. 300 

LVII. The God of Justice,. 302 • 

LVIII. The God of Free Agency,. 304 

LIX. The God of Happiness,. 309 

LX. The God of Marriage,.. 312 

LXI. The God of Children,. 314 

LXII. The God of Reason,. 321 

LXEII. The God of Desires,. . 326 

LXIV. The God of Liberty,. 334 

LXY. The God of Oppression,.340 

LXVI. The God of Punishment,. 342 

LXVII. The God of Publications,. 344 

LXYIII. The God of Presents,. 347 

LXIX. The God of Conjugal Love,. 348 

LXX. The God of Affinity,. 352 

LXXI. The God of the Affections,. 353 

LXX1I. The Blamable God,. 354 

LXXIII. The God of Industry,. 355 

LXXIV. The Social God,. 356 

LXXY. The God of Secret Societies,. 357 

LXXVI. The God of Slavery,. 359 

LXXVII. The God of Exchange,. 360 

LXXVIII. The God of Political Parties,. 363 

LXXIX. The Conscientious God,. 364 

LXXX. The God of Schools,. 3G6 

LXXXr. The God of Spiritual Mediums,. 3C9 

LXXXII. The God of Public Opinion,. 372 

LXXXIII. The God of Expediency,. 373 

LXXXIV. The God of Selfish Teaching,. 373 

LXXXV. The God of Organizations,. 375 

LXXXVI. The God of Facts,. 379 

LXXXVII. The God of Free Love,. 382 

LXXXVIII. The God of the Striving,. 382 

LXXXIX. The God of Public Speakers,. 383 

XC. The God of Courtship,. 384 

XCI. The God of Example,. 385 

XCII. The Divorced God,. 385 

XCIII. The God of Sympathy,. 386 

XCIV. The God of Sorrow,. 387 

XCV. The Better God,. 387 

XCVI. The God of Dispraise,. 388 














































V1U 


CONTENTS. 


ARTICLE. PAGE 

XCYII. The God of Flattery,. 389 

XCVTII. The God of Conversation,. 390 

XCIX. The God of Anticipation,. 390 

C. The God of Policy,. 392 

Cl. The God of Misery,. 393 

CII. The God of Wisdom,. 393 

CIII. The God of Reminiscences,. 9 4 

CIV. The God of Legislation,. 395 

CV. The God of Retaliation,. 399 

CVI. The God of Enemies,. 400 

CVII. The God of Motives,. 401 

CVIII. The God of Toil,. 401 

CIX. The God of the Past,. 405 

CX. The God of Pleasure and Pain,.. 406 

CXI. The God of the Faithful,. 408 

CXII. The God of Joy,. 409 

CXIII. The God of Obligations,. 410 

CXIV. The God of Valuation,. 411 

CXV. The God of Currency,. 412 

CXVI. The God of Bargains,. 413 

CXVII. The God of Instruction,. 414 

CXVIII. The God of Theory and Speculation,. 415 

CXIX. The God of Trades and Professions,. 416 

CXX. The God of the Old and Young,. 418 

CXXI. The God of Legacies,. 419 

CXXII. The Practical God,. 419 

CXXIII. The Doubting God,. 420 

CXXIV. The Feeble God,. 421 

CXXV. The God of Knowledge,. 421 

CXXVI. The God of Self-Denial, Patience, and Self-Sacrifice,... 422 

CXXVII. The God of Charity,. 424 

CXXVIII. The God of Profanity,. 425 

CXXIX. The God of Free Discussion,. . 425 

CXXX. The Investigating God,. 426 

CXXXI. The Abused God,. 427 

CXXXII. The God of Immortality,. 427 

CXXXIII. The God of Non-Resistance,. 428 

CXXXIV. The God of Mothers,. 429 

CXXXV. The God of Endless Punishment. 429 

CXXXVI. The True and False God,. 430 

CXXXVII. The Popular God,. 431 

CXXXVIII. The God of Prophecy,. 431 

CXXXIX. The God of Chance,. 432 

CXL. The God of Fate,. . 433 













































CONTENTS. ix 

ARTICLE. PAGE. 

CXLI. The God of Design,. . 433 

CXLII. The God of the First Cause,. 433 

CXLIII. The God of F.eformers,. 434 

CXLIV. The God of Christianity,. 435 

CXLV. The God of the Creation,. 43G 

CXLYI. The God of the Flood,. 437 

CXLVII. The God of the Bible Prophets,. 438 

CXLVIII. The God of the Disciples of Christ,. 440 

CXLIX. The God of the Followers of Great Men,. 440 

CL. The God of Love,. . 441 

CLI. The Converted God,. 442 

CLII. The God of Rewards,. 442 

CLIII. The God of Jesu3 Christ,. 446 

CLIV. The God of Independent Action,. 448 

CLY. The God of Faith,. 449 

CLVI. The Self Existent God,. 451 

CLVII. The Intuitive God,. 452 

CLVIII The God of Communicating with the Dead,. 453 

CLIX. The God of the Cares of Life,. 454 

CLX. The God of Misfortune,. 454 

CLXI. The Indifferent God,. 455 

CLXII. The Sad God,. 455 

CLXIII. The Peculiar God,. 455 

CLXIY. The God of Jubilees,. 456 

CLXY. The Patriotic God,. 456 

CLXVI. The Military God,. 456 

CLXVII. The Courageous God,. 457 

CLXVIII. The God of Mementos,. 457 

CLXIX. The God of Friends,. 458 

CLXX. The Recommended God,. 458 

CLXXI. The God of Sickness,. 461 

CLXXII. The God of the Pleasures of Appetite,. 462 

CLXXIII. The God of the Passions,. 462 

CLXXIY. The Impressed God,. 463 

CLXXV. The God of the Dead,. 464 

CLXXVI. The God of Anecdotes,. 465 

CLXXVII. The Guilty God,..'. 465 

CLXXVIII. The God of Duty,. 466 

CLXXIX. The God of Relics,. 467 

CLXXX. The God of Blessings,. 467 

CLXXXI. The God of Righteousness,. 467 

CLXXXII. The God of Sin,. 468 

CLXXXIII. The God of Great Men,. 468 













































X 


CONTEXTS 


ARTICLE. PAGE. 

CLXXXIV. The Pious God,. 469 

CLXXXY. The God of Pity,. 469 

CLXXXVI. The God of Kindness,. 469 

CLXXXVII. The God of Protection,. 470 

CLXXXVIII. The Local God,. 470 

CLXXXIX. The God of Disgrace,. 471 

CXC. The God of Amusements,.4 71 

CXCI. The God of Endeavor,. 471 

CXCII. The Curious God,. 472 

CXC1II. The Inquisitive God,. 472 

CXCIY. The God of Recreation,. 472 

CXCV. The Jealous God,. 473 

CXCVL The God of Glory,. 473 

CXCYII. The Honorable God,. 473 

CXCVIII. The Accommodating God,. 473 

CXCIX. The Modest God,. 474 

CC. The God of Purity,. 474 

CCI. The Aristocratic God,. 474 

CCII. The Respectable God,. 473 

CCIII. The Economical God,. 475 

CCIV. The God of Worship,. 475 

CCY. The God of Custom,. 475 

CCVI. The God of Habit,. 476 

CCVII. The Intemperate God,. 476 

CCVIII. The Reference God,. 476 

CCIX. The God of the Imagination and Fancy,. 477 

CCX. The God of Forgiveness,. 477 

CCXI. The God of Baptism,. 478 

CCXII. Tbe God of Preaching,. 478 

CCXIII. The God of Visions,. 479 

CCXIV. The God of Premiums,. 479 

CCXV. The God of Speech,. 479 

CCXVI. The Choosing God,. 480 

CCXVII. The Superstitious God,. 481 

CCXVIII. The Selecting God. 481 

CCXIX. The God of Possessions,. 483 

CCXX. The God of Method,. 483 

CCXXI. The God of Appetite,. 483 

CCXXII. The God of Laws,. 484 

CCXXIII. The God of Usage,. 484 

CCXXIV. The God of Ceremony, . 485 

CCXXY. The God of Emotion,. 485 

CCXXVI. The God of Plans,. 485 













































CONTENTS. XI 

ARTICLE. PAGE. 

CCXXVII. The God of Excitement,. 487 

CCXXVIII. The Disagreeable God,. 487 

CCXXIX. The God of Prejudices,. 488 

CCXXX. The Selfish Gods,. 488 

CCXXXI. The Acts of Selfishness. 490 

CCXXXII. Obstructions to Freedom,. 493 

COXXXIII. The Free,. 503 











PHILOSOPHY OP LIPE 


PART I. 

ARTICLE I. 

CONSCIOUSNESS. 

Consciousness is to man the fact of existence; for 
without it, to himself he would not exist; therefore, all 
beings who are conscious of existence, know of their 
own existence, and the existence of every thing they 
meet. 


ARTICLE II. 

LOCALITY. 

The conception of locality is different in every being. 
The space in which man has a consciousness of exist¬ 
ence and control, is in accordance with his cultivation. 
At first, every thing seems beyond control that his hands 
cannot reach; but as he increases in years, with the con¬ 
sciousness of a more extended control, comes also an 
increase of locality. The locality of man is embraced 
in the range of vision and existences that surround him. 





2 


INFINITY. 


To all finite beings there is locality; but to, each one 
locality is different. 

Man may be constantly moving, and know locality as 
much as if confined to one place ; he may embrace in 
his locality every thing about the earth and be local as 
before. For a being to increase in locality, is to 
embrace in his consciousness a more extended control 
over things that are more remote; but however much 
he may increase in this way, he is always local, because 
he is not infinite. 

Man can have a conception of an increase of locality 
that can come to him in one place ; and an increase in 
the number of points he can visit in the same moments 
of time ; and an increase in the distances he may be 
able to overcome in visiting unknown places. 


ARTICLE III. 

INFINITY. 

Man obtains ideas of every thing after his develop¬ 
ment. Two beings in looking at any thing, obtain 
different information respecting it. There are qualities 
belonging to every thing confined to the conception of 
one man ; and different qualities for every one examin¬ 
ing the same thing. Therefore, every thing is infinite 
in qualities to man, through information he may obtain 
from different persons ; and also infinite in qualities, 
because he is himself constantly changing; and also 
infinite in qualities, because the thing examined is 
constantly changing; and also infinite in qualities, 



TIME. 


3 


because all changes are connected with each other, 
through an infinite number of causes and effects. 

Therefore, each one and all things are infinite to the 
consciousness of man, because they are ever beyond his 
comprehension. 


ARTICLE IV. 

TIME. 

To the consciousness of man time is attached to all 
things; for to him all things have their spring and 
autumn. The consciousness of time in one man is 
never like that in another ; for the changes of life 
are long or short to him, depending on his relative 
condition. 

The knowledge of time to man is through the con¬ 
sciousness of controls in his locality. Man may be able 
to meet in the same moments of time more existences, 
and be able to will and act oftener in the same moments, 
and be able to increase in that length of time he knows 
as the present moment. 

The present moment, and the rapidity of willing and 
acting, increasing forever, will be to the consciousness 
the new present moment of time; consequently, to the 
consciousness of man in his present condition, he must 
ever know time. 



4 


SPACE, CHANGES, ETC. 


ARTICLE Y. 

SPACE. 

Because man cannot occupy two places at the same 
moment of time, he knows space; therefore, without 
the knowledge of time, there would be no knowledge 
of space. 

To the present conception of man, however much he 
may be able to overcome distances, he will always know 
space; because, the making of things that are far away 
near, comprises his new locality. 


ARTICLE YI. 

CHANGES. 

To the consciousness of man, changes are constantly 
taking place in everything in his locality. 


ARTICLE VII. 

CAUSE AND EFFECTS. 

Man, to his consciousness, lives in successive moments 
of time; therefore, an act now to him is a cause to an 
effect in the future. But he cannot pro re but the 
future is as much a cause of what is taking place now 
as is the past; for in the infinity of action, every thing 




5 




INFINITE ACTION. 

is a cause and every thing an effect ; and man cannot 
show that any one thing is more a cause of what is 
taking place now than another. He cannot prove that 
any one thing is any more a cause to any thing that 
ever took place than another ; for he cannot show that 
the cause exists any more previous to the effect than 
afterwards ; or any more in one period of time than in 
another, for all things are connected; and hence, every 
effect must be the result of an infinity of causes, exist¬ 
ing in all periods of time; and no one thing any more a 
cause or an effect than another. 

Cause and effect exist to the consciousness of man, 
because he knows time; the cause ever preceding in 
time the effect. This conception of cause and effect 
belongs to the changes that take place in time; for man 
cannot behold every thing as a cause, and every thing as 
an effect. The infinity of causes and effects, belong to 
the infinity of relations that connect every thing. There¬ 
fore, man cannot prove any one thing to be a cause 
or an effect to any thing more than another. 


ARTICLE VIII. 

INFINITE ACTION. 

Man can not understand infinity; therefore, he can 
not say that in one moment of time infinite action 
commenced. He can not trace any thing back, and 
come to a commencement. If he says of the earth, 
trees, or grass, that a being willed they should be, he 
can not ascertain in what period of time they were pro- 


i* 



6 


LOVE AND SELFISHNESS. 


duced, for lie finds them effects proceeding from causes, 
which increase in number as he has faculties developed 
to discover them. Therefore, man can not reach that 
point in time in which anything was commenced or 
willed to be by infinite action; for causes will ever mul¬ 
tiply to his new researches. 

That man wills in any moment of time, is an effect, 
as is the existence of the trees or the earth. He is una¬ 
ble to trace into the past or future, and come to any first 
willing of infinite action, that causes him to will in a 
given moment of time. Man may see things about him 
in the present moments of existence, and suppose that 
their conditions, and locality induce him to will ; but 
the condition of things that cause him to will, are ef¬ 
fects from causes which he can not prove to exist any 
more in the present moment than in the past or fu¬ 
ture. 


ARTICLE IX. 

LOVE AND SELFISHNESS. 

Love is not selfishness. A selfish love or attachment 
clings to some of the conditions of life. Love does not 
prefer conditions. 

As all the conditions of life are constantly changing, 
all selfish loves and attachments must be interrupted ; 
hence, whoever has a selfish love or attachment, must 
have misery, through fear of the changes of life, and 
through the interruption of that selfish love or attachment 
which must take place. Love is freedom from misery, 
because it is not selfishness; hence, he who loves does 



FAITH. 


7 


not fear any of the changes of life, and cannot be pre¬ 
vented from loving by any thing. 

As the joys of selfish loves and attachments can be 
interrupted, and as the joy of love free from selfishness 
can not be interrupted, Love and Selfishness become 
standards, from which man may learn how joy may be 
found. 

If man aspires for joy, he should endeavor to love 
and to do acts of love, and avoid selfishness and the 
acts of selfishness ; for love is joy that can not be in¬ 
terrupted, and hence, love is liberty; and selfishness is 
joy that can be interrupted; and hence, selfishness is 
bondage. 


ARTICLE X. 

FAITH. 

Man is constantly seeking what he thinks will bring 
to him joy ; and in that conception of joy he has faith; 
therefore, he is at every moment of his life what his 
faith makes him. 

Every act of man is through faith, because he acts 
under all circumstances known to him in that manner 
which he believes will bring to him joy. Hence, for 
any being to act, and not act by faith, that being must 
act without any previous or posterior cause for acting, 
which, to the conception of man is impossible. 

Anything that man has not faith in as giving to him 
joy, is to him misery. As all men aspire for joy, none 
will go from joy to misery to their conception. What¬ 
ever loves man has faith in as giving joy, he has the 



8 


FAITH. 


joy that his loves are capable of giving. If he has 
faith in love free from selfishness, he possesses the joy 
that love can give. If he has faith in selfish loves and 
attachments, he has the joy that selfish loves and at¬ 
tachments can give. If man has faith in love, he pos¬ 
sesses love in the moment of his faith; if he has faith 
in any selfish love, he possesses that selfish love in the 
moment of his faith; consequently, the joy of man is 
equal to his faith, — or, he possesses in every moment 
of time the joy his faith is capable of giving, 

This faith should not be confounded with what men 
say they believe ; for man may say he believes in love, 
when he has no faith in it; for if he has faith in love, 
his joy will be to love, and do the acts of love; and to 
do any thing less than this would be to him misery. 

Man seeks for every thing he has faith in, for every¬ 
thing he has faith in, is his joy. If man is seeking for 
wealth, fame, or pleasure, it is because he has faith in 
them. If he murders, or steals, it is to his concep¬ 
tion joy; and he has faith in those acts. If he vio¬ 
lates his conscience, it is to his conception joy, and he 
has faith in so doing. In every act man seeks for joy, 
through faith. He may be in conditions of life he 
would not seek; but in all conditions of life in which 
he is placed, he is seeking his joy through faith; hence, 
he must act after his faith in all moments of time. 
Man can have no conception of any being, that does not 
act as his faith leads him. 

If man loves eating, drinking, narcotics, sexual indul¬ 
gence, fame, wealth, or ease, in these things he has 
faith as giving joy; and any thing that would conflict 
with the possession of these, would be to him misery. 


FAITH. 


9 


Man deceives himself, when he supposes he has faith in 
things in which he does not see joy. The reason why 
he does not always follow his conceptions of duty, is, 
because he has not faith in them as giving joy, but faith 
in other things instead of them. If he sees joy in 
being fashionable, wealthy, and famous, in all instances 
where his conceptions of duty would conflict with this 
faith, to follow those conceptions would be misery. 

Whatever joy man shall possess in the future, he must 
attain through faith, and it never will commence com¬ 
ing to him, until he has faith in it. He may believe 
that he would like to possess freedom, while he is 
depriving the poor of their inheritance ; but in this 
condition he has no faith in freedom, but faith in the 
possession of wealth more than in the calls of love. 
He may think there is joy in loving others, while he 
is using deception in trade ; but he has no faith in lov¬ 
ing others, because if he had, he would not deceive 
them. He may think there is joy in purity, while he 
is seeking indulgence; but he has faith in indulgence, 
and no faith in purity. 

If a man cannot escape temptation, he is deceived if 
he thinks he has faith in love. He may be suffering from 
the effects of indulgence, and for this reason wish 
himself in some other condition, or wish he had.not 
done those things that cause him distress; but he may 
have faith in his selfish desires the same. He would 
prefer his selfish desires, if they did not afflict him with 
pain ; therefore he has faith in them if they do afflict him. 
If man has faith in any selfishness as bringing to him 
joy, were it not for the effects of its action, he never 
will be able to escape its influences, no difference how 


10 


FAITH. 


much that selfishness may cause him to suffer, or how 
strongly he would like to escape his suffering ; he still 
has faith in it, and can go to no new joy because his 
faith will prevent. If he has faith in indulgence as 
giving joy, he never can escape its influences except by 
faith in the joy of love. He may be smarting from the 
consequence of indulgence, and desire to be in any con¬ 
dition in order to be away from his passions and temp¬ 
tations ; he can not leave them, until he has faith that 
joy is prevented by indulgence. Man may desire 
liquors, and as long as he continues to drink, he has 
faith in so doing as giving to him joy. He may deplore 
the effects on his system and imagination, and wish 
that he had never tasted of them; but if he still con¬ 
tinues to drink, he has faith in them; and he can never 
escape the effects of the evil, except through faith that 
drinking prevents joy in his present condition, and faith 
that it prevents joy, if drinking did not affect him in¬ 
juriously. Man should not say he desires to leave any 
evil, when he does not leave it; for if he does not leave 
it, he still has faith in it as giving joy. 

If man has faith that drinking liquors or indulgence 
prevents joy, he at once leaves them ; and if this faith 
continues, he is never tempted by their influences ; for no 
one will go from joy to misery. 

Man should not say he has faith in better things than 
those which he practices. A man might like liquors 
and not drink, because they would injure him ; but in 
this condition he has faith in drinking ; and should 
any time come in which he could see no injury to him¬ 
self or others, he would drink. A man might like in¬ 
dulgence, and deny himself on account of the opinion 


FAITH. 


11 


of society, or the effect on his imagination ; he has no 
higher faith in consequence of this denial ; and if cir- 
snmstances occur where he could see no deplored effect 
on himself or others, he would cease to practice self- 
denial. But if he has faith that indulgence prevents joy, 
indulgence ceases to be a temptation as long as this faith 
continues. 

Whoever are obliged to practice self-denial, have faith 
in some selfishness. The necessity of practicing it 
shows a want of faith in love, and in practising it there 
is no change for the better. Man may deny to himself 
indulgences ; he is as selfish as if his desires were grati¬ 
fied. If a being denies to himself indulgence from 
youth until manhood, he is constantly in a state of sel¬ 
fishness. Whoever spends years in denying to them¬ 
selves things their consciences foibid, gain no strength by 
the act. But if man has faith that'indulgence prevents 
joy, this joy is his new love, and this new love takes the 
place of his old desire. Faith is instantaneous in its 
work. If a man believes any selfishness prevents joy, 
in that moment he leaves it. The moment man has faith 
in any new joy, he seeks it. Self-denial brings nothing. 
Man can never leave his passions except through faith. 
The long practice of self-denial with increasing desire, 
gives strength to selfish influences, and man conimits 
the denied acts oftener when restraining influences are 
taken away. 

Man may practice self-denial, and forget, in time, 
amidst other cares, the desire to indulgence ; but if he 
has not gone to a new love, he has gained nothing ; for 
he is never free from any selfishness, except he has gone 
to a new love. 


12 


SELFISHNESS. 


No selfish, love or attachment can be left except 
through faith that it prevents joy. Man must have faith 
that joy is prevented, under all circumstances in which 
it is possible for him to possess or enjoy a selfish love 
or attachment, in order to be forever free from its 
influences. 


ARTICLE XI. 

SELFISHNESS. 

1. It is selfish in man, in giving his conceptions of 
truth, to give any authority. It is selfish to prefer any 
class of truths, and say they are superior to others, be¬ 
cause some beings have believed them to be such; for * 
man can not prove that he should follow the conceptions 
of one being more than another, except through a self¬ 
ish preference. It is selfish in man to give authority 
for truth, to suit the prejudices of those he is teaching. 
It is selfish in man, in teaching one class of people, to 
say the founder of their class taught as himself. It is 
selfish to declare to another class, that his truth is the 
doctrine of Isaiah, Christ, or Paul. No authority is 
given for truth, except for selfish purposes. He who 
gives authority for truth, is anxious to have others be¬ 
lieve as himself. Man should strive to see joy in that 
action which causes every one to believe as they do. 

It is selfish in man to assert that his conceptions of 
truth should be believed, or that they are better 
than any other truths that ever have or will be taught. 
All believe what is necessary for them in all periods of 
their existence. When man assumes that any truth is 



SELFISHNESS. 


13 


superior to another, or should be believed in preference, 
he is assuming to teach from authority. Every one’s 
conception of truth is limited; and what the wisest as¬ 
sert to be truth now, another generation may prove to 
be false. Man can give his conceptions of truth to the 
world; but if he is giving them that the world may be¬ 
lieve as himself, he is acting from selfish motives, and 
is inviting the world to he selfish. 

2 . It is selfish to refer to God as authority, by saying 
what he is and does; for, whoever speaks of God, 
speaks of his conceptions of an exalted being; and no 
one of man’s conceptions of truth, can be used as au¬ 
thority more than another ; and it is as selfish in man to 
impersonate all his conceptions and use them as author¬ 
ity respecting an unknown being, as to seek authority 
from any other source. Whoever uses authority, be¬ 
comes anxious to have others believe as himself. 

3. It is selfish to refer to nature as authority, by say¬ 
ing when men conform to it and when they do not. 
One act of a man’s life is as much after nature as anoth- • 
er ; for, it cannot be shown that man can go out of na¬ 
ture to do anything. Man can not judge of things in¬ 
finite in their connections, and say that one course is 
nearer to nature than another. If man is misled, who 
shall say where is the straight path? To say that 
man would be better if he would conform to nature, is 
the same as saying man would be better in one condi¬ 
tion than in another; for, whoever thinks nature points 
out the best course, can only give his conception of 
what that course is; and whoever is attached to that 
particular course, is attached to conditions. No other 
conception of nature can be given to the world, except- 

2 


14 


SELFISHNESS. 


ing from finite beings ; therefore, whatever conception 
of nature is taught is a finite one, and consequently, 
one in which man must know disappointments and griefs. 
It is imposssble to prove that any one being’s concep¬ 
tion of nature is superior to that of another He who is 
teaching nature, is giving his highest conceptions, 
and they come no more from nature than does the 
conceptions of every being who - gives his best ideas 
of truth and duty. 

4. It is selfish to judge another, with reference to 
awarding merit or demerit. It is impossible to prove 
that any act or condition of life is more ordained or ap¬ 
pointed, is more necessary or unnecessary than others, 
or will do more good or evil. Every man acts 
through faith, and all his acts are imperative; for, 
when he has faith that the doing of any thing is joy, 
he must seek his joy in doing it. All seek joy from 
those things in which they have faith, and no credit 
or blame can be attached to one being more than 
another for any of the causes or effects that take place ; 
hence, all acts of judging with reference to merit or de¬ 
merit, must arise from the selfish feelings. 

5. It is selfish to seek to attach others to any particu¬ 
lar name or sect, for in so doing man assumes to j udge 
for another. Man cannot love, when he is seeking to 
give a selfish influence ; nor is man made better by hav¬ 
ing his selfish feelings diverted into new channels. Man 
can never seek to attach any one to his sect, except 
through some mercenary motive. Man should not sup¬ 
pose while he is working for the interest of sect, he can 
give a better faith ; for no one can be less selfish, except 
through love. 


SELFISHNESS. 


15 


6. It is selfish in man to make a creed, or an article 
of faith. If man makes a creed for the world, and it 
is not believed, he is disappointed ; and when disap¬ 
pointed, he should seek that he may be free from his 
selfishness. No one will worry, or seek to control the 
belief of others, except through a selfish attachment. 
Those who are in grief about the belief of others, 
should seek to see joy in having every one believe as 
they do. 

7. It is selfish in man to seek to defend his belief. 
He who would defend his belief, is attached to a class 
of truths. The truths that one believes are of no more 
consequence than the truths of any one else existing ; 
for faith in love should tell man that every one believes 
what is best. Therefore, if the truth of one man is 
attacked, if he wishes to continue in his belief, it becomes 
of no importance to him ; and he can only seek to de¬ 
fend his belief through fear that others, who now think 
as himself, will cease to do so ; and no one is a judge 
of what others should believe ; and to seek to control 
the belief of others, is an act of selfishness. 

8. It is selfish in man to be annoyed, because what 
he thinks to be error is believed by the people. 
Man should not presume to judge, and say what the 
people should believe ; but should see joy in their be¬ 
lieving as they do. One man may teach there is one 
God, and another may teach there are three Gods, and 
if either shall be rejoiced, or in grief, at the success or 
want of success of the other, it is selfish. Man 
should not say that the belief in one or three Gods is 
the best for the world to believe; for when he does, he 
is presuming that all can be as himself. 


16 


SE LFISHNESS . 


9. It is selfish to contend about truth or opinions ; 
for no one can contend about any thing, excepting a 
selfish attachment. One can not contend about truth, 
except he is anxious to give it to others as he believes 
it. All may give their conceptions of truth, as an act of 
love, but no one should contend that his conception of 
truth should be believed in preference to others. The 
more selfish any one is, the more confident does he feel 
that his belief is the truth for all. 

10. It is selfish in man to seek to defend his reputa¬ 
tion. Whoever says the character of another is bad, 
has presumed to judge ; and whoever is grieved incon¬ 
sequence of the judgment of others, is so through a 
selfish love to their opinions. One selfish act com¬ 
mitted by others should not afflict man, any more than any 
other act, and if it does, it should tell him of his selfish¬ 
ness. Will one say if his character is aspersed it will 
destroy his usefulness? Man can not judge over his 
competency to be useful, and he should not worry but 
there will be messengers enough to teach. Man should 
not be unhappy because the world judges him and calls 
him evil ; neither should he defend his character, for 
in doing so he gives a selfish preference to the opinion 
of others, by saying he would rather have them think 
him in one condition than in another. 

11. It is selfish to speak or write of the faults of oth¬ 
ers, or to point out errors in beliefs for personal gratifi¬ 
cation. Man should not tell of the faults of others, in 
order to tell the world that he is able to discover them, 
or to excite curiosity or censure. He can only point out 
errors from his love, when those errors are esteemed as 
a good ; and it is selfish to do this, except to his concep- 


SELFISHNESS. 


IT 


tion there is a demand. Man has no means of proving 
that every one should believe his conceptions of faults or 
selfish acts, or errors in belief; and if he becomes anx¬ 
ious. that they should, he shows a selfish attachment to 
his own conceptions that will prevent acts of love. 

12 . It is selfish to teach men to do good that hell 
may be avoided, or heaven be gained. Man may, for 
any future object, do any acts which society or creeds 
may prescribe, but there is no method by which he can 
be less selfish, except through love. Whoever is labor¬ 
ing for any future object or condition, is laboring from 
mercenary motives ; and it must also impair his faith in 
love, when he supposes that his future condition may 
not be precisely as he would like to have it. If man is 
free, he must be so in some present moment of his life; 
for it is only in the present moment that he has a con¬ 
sciousness of existence. The selfishness that causes 
man to flee from the present condition or moments of 
life to an imaginary existence, causes him to fear for 
the future. He who dislikes the condition in which 
he is placed in the present moment, will have fears of 
every condition in life; therefore, to have any fears 
respecting the future, is selfish. If men will have faith 
in the changes of life, and strive to see joy in them, 
they will not try selfishly to gain heaven or avoid hell; 
for love cannot be bought and sold, and can only come 
through faith that it gives joy. 

13. It is selfish to teach that the future world is su¬ 
perior to this, or that when men die, they are free from 
the cares and troubles incident to this life. Man can 
never suppose that more will be done for him in the 
future than at the present moment, except that he 


2* 


18 


SELFISHNESS. 


expects that his present conceptions of joy shall then 
be brought to him. But if his present conceptions of 
joys are not with him, they are dependent joys. Man 
has cares and troubles, because he is selfish. In what¬ 
ever place in the universe man becomes free, he has 
continual joy. To say that man cannot have joy in this 
world as well as in any other, is to say that there are 
favorite places and persons. Man, on account of his 
selfish attachments, may prefer some places to others, 
hut until all his selfish attachments are overcome, he 
can not be free. He can not say one place is superior 
to another, because he can see more ; and if he is 
thinking the future life is better than this, he is thinking 
of his personal gratification. All personal pleasures are 
dependent, and can not be sought or wished for except 
as selfish loves ; but to love and do acts of love is not 
a dependent joy, and can he done in one moment of 
existence as well as in another. If man supposes after 
death he shall be in a superior condition to what he 
has known here, that condition becomes a selfish love ; 
and when he has been disappointed in all other selfish 
desires, he clings the more selfishly to this. The future 
world can not be proved to be superior to this, neither 
can one place be proved to be better than another for 
man to gain his freedom. The man that has cares, 
troubles, and disappointments now, can be taken to no 
place in the universe but he will have the same, because 
he is never free until he loves irrespective of condition 
and circumstances. The selfishness that causes man to 
expect to enjoy more on account of some pleasure, 
leads him to expect to enjoy more after death. 

14. It is selfish to seek to be in any condition, soci- 


SELF ISHNESS. 


19 


ety, or circle in the future world, in preference to 
another. To seek conditions in the future world is as 
selfish as to seek them in this. No exclusive states of 
existence can exist, except through selfish loves. It is 
an act of selfishness to seek to be away from the mur¬ 
derer, the harlot, the assassin, and the libertine. Where 
shall the strong in toil go ? Where shall the free be 
found that can not be corrupted or tempted ? They 
must toil as acts of love for the selfish. The free are 
free every where. Their joy is as great among the de¬ 
graded as among the pure. He who expects exalted 
conditions in the future world, may have given up many 
of the pleasures of appetite, and think that he is less 
selfish, when his selfishness has only been changed to 
another desire. Different circles or societies do not 
exist any where except through selfish loves. 

15. It is selfish to adhere to the rule that man should 
do by others as he would have others to do by him; 
for it continually invites him to judge others. Man 
should always act, when he can do so, as an act of love ; 
but if he judges from his own standard, he would refuse 
to do for another in all instances where he would object 
having the same things done for himself. This will pre¬ 
vent acts of love ; for one would wish for something, 
which another with a different faith would esteem useless 
in the same condition. Man may, through his selfishness, 
deny to his brother the comforts of life, because he, in 
the same condition, would do without them. It would 
be an act of oppression to refuse to gratify many of the 
selfish desires of men ; for the objects of selfish desire 
to the free are of no consequence, and they can give 
them to the selfish as acts of love, to invite them to love ; 


SELFISHNESS. 


20 

while in the same condition, they would not wish for 
the same things. This rule invites man to judge others 
through himself, which is an act of selfishness. Man 
must seek to do for others irrespective of any considera¬ 
tions whether under similar circumstances he would 
wish the same things done for himself. Man 
should act from his love ; and when free he might help 
another constantly, while he would not wish for any¬ 
thing in a similar condition. Hence, to adhere to this 
rule is selfish. 

16. It is selfish to teach that God revealed himself to 
men at any period of time. If God revealed himself 
at one period of time, that time must have been a super¬ 
ior period to others ; and he must also have chosen 
men to whom he could reveal himself, which must 
make those men superior to others in all periods. It is 
selfish to presume that one period in time is better than 
another, or that care is more exercised over one than 
another. If one class of men are believed superior, 
they become objects of selfish preferences ; if one period 
in time is superior to*another, it becomes a period of 
selfish attachment. All preferences must be overcome 
before man can be free. 

17. It is selfish to teach that men shall be saved, or 
are not exposed to any future hell or calamity. To 
teach that all shall be happy hereafter, is teaching a 
selfish love of some definite period in time. Man 
should seek to see joy in the present moment of his life 
through love; and this can only bring to him joy. To 
teach that man shall be happy hereafter, is teaching 
that outward and dependent circumstances shall make 
him so instead of love. Man should anticipate no 


SELFISHNESS. 


21 


future condition of his life, as an object of love in pre¬ 
ference to another; one moment in time cannot be 
shown to be better than another. 

18. It is selfish to teach that man can converse with 
the angels, if he will do good; or that his present body 
shall assimilate in form to that of some animals, if he 
continues in the indulgence of passion. Any motive by • 
which men can be taught, excepting that of love, is 
mercenary. Man cannot love, because he would attain 
or avoid any thing, for in doing so his love becomes 
selfish. He can only love, believing it to be joy in the 
present moment of his existence. To try to love now, 
believing it will bring joy in the future, is as merce¬ 
nary as to seek fame or wealth. It is as selfish in man 
to seek for future joys that he believes shall endure for¬ 
ever, as to seek for transient joys. The more joys a 
man thinks he shall obtain, the more selfishly does he 
seek them. But to love in the present moment of life 
is not selfish, and the joy that comes with it is not 
selfish, because it is not dependent. 

19. It is selfish to teach there is life beyond the 
grave, or to wish for the same, or to wish for existence 
from one moment in time to another. It is of no con¬ 
sequence whether man believes in a future existence, 
for in the present moments of life he has nothing to do 
with that existence. The concern of man is with his 
present consciousness of existence. The same selfish¬ 
ness that causes man to cling to the moments of life 
here, causes him to wish to extend that life into the 
future world. Man should seek to see joy in love, 
and unless he has faith in the events of life, he cannot 


SELFISHNESS. 


love. If man wishes for a succeeding moment of exist¬ 
ence in this life, that wish is selfish, for it may be that 
he shall not see that moment. Man ceases to exist in 
this life in some successive, unknown moment; there¬ 
fore, to wish for existence beyond that moment, is wish¬ 
ing for a dependent joy. Every future moment of life 
to which the mind of man clings, is a selfish attach¬ 
ment that is diverting his attention from the present 
moment in which he should strive to love. Does man 
say that he has a home not made with hands when all 
things fail him here ? Does man think, when the cares 
of life are over, he shall go into the presence of God ? 
Does man say that he will become as the angels ? Every 
anticipated pleasure in the future, is a dependent joy. 
Man should see joy in the present moment, instead of 
anticipating it in some future present moment, for when 
the future present moment comes, he is as likely to 
anticipate it then as previously. 

20. It is selfish to weep, grieve, or to have any sor¬ 
row on account of any of the events of life. Man can 
not grieve over any of the events of life, except through 
his selfish feelings. He cannot grieve over the loss of 
property, reputation, or from the disappointment of any 
of his desires, except from selfish attachments. Man 
cannot prove that he should be rich, or wise, or in any 
one condition in preference to another. If he has faith 
in love, he will believe that in whatever condition he is 
placed, that it is a manifestation of love. 

It is selfish to grieve over the death of friends. 
Man may become as selfishly attached to individuals, as 
to things and conditions. Love is superior to all con- 


SELFISHNESS. 


23 

ditions and circumstances. To be free, man must love 
the world as he finds it. lie should not wish for con¬ 
ditions for others, any more than for himself. 

It is selfish to be sorry for any of the past acts of 
life ; for if man regrets or grieves over any thing he 
has done, he must believe that all action does not take 
place as it should. He should not have grief over one 
act more than another of his life ; for if he selects some 
acts and supposes love is not manifest in them as in 
others, he does so through some selfish attachment. 
Man grieves over the effects of acts, and not over the 
acts themselves ; the effect to his conception has pro¬ 
duced a condition he dislikes. One condition is not 
superior to another; if it is, the joys of man are depend¬ 
ent. When man discovers to his conception that the 
acts of the past have placed him in a condition he 
deplores, instead of grieving that he committed those 
acts, he should strive to see in them manifestation of 
love ; and strive to discover the motive's of selfishness 
that called him to action, that he may become stronger; 
and strive to see joy in his present condition, which to 
him is the effect cf those acts. He who from a long 
course of selfishness has wasted his property and lost 
position in society, in grieving over the consequences, 
commits another act of selfishness ; for it is of no conse¬ 
quence whether he is rich or poor; and if one position 
in society is worth more than another, his joys are 
dependent. He cannot grieve over the loss of position 
in society, except through a selfish attachment. There¬ 
fore it is selfishness in man to regret any of his acts in 
the past, or those of others. Man cannot grieve over 
wrongs, except from some selfish attachment; he sees 


u 


SELFISHNESS. 


in his wrongs the causes to privations which he deplores, 
while in those privations he should strive to see a man¬ 
ifestation of love. Those who sorrow over acts, are the 
more likely to commit them under similar circum¬ 
stances, or to change their selfish loves into new 
channels. 

21 . It is selfish to laugh or rejoice over any of the events 
of life. Man can not laugh at the follies, jokes, or misde¬ 
meanors of others, if he loves; neither can he rejoice 
over any success to his desires except he is selfishly 
attached to them. 

22 . It is selfish to teach that God will punish any 
one for any acts, or that man should be punished by 
another for any thing he does. No one can be less sel¬ 
fish except through love. Man may do every thing 
that society wishes of him through fear, he is not better 
than when he follows his desires ; in one instance he is 
giving attention to the selfish interests of society, through 
a selfish fear ; and in the other, he is giving his attention 
to his own selfish interests. No one can seek to pun¬ 
ish another, except he believes the person an agent in 
disappointing him in some selfish attachment. Penal¬ 
ties must be inflicted for personal gratification, and not 
through a love of the guilty and the injured. He who 
is gratified at the infliction of punishment to others, loves 
less ; and is not inviting to acts of love, when he would 
torture his brother. Therefore, all punishments or in¬ 
flictions of penalties are acts of selfishness. 

23 . It is selfish in man to be annoyed at any injury 
he may receive. All annoyances arise from the selfish 
feelings. Man should seek to be faithful over every 
thing in his care ; but he should have no selfish attach- 


SELFISHNESS. 


25 


ment to things in his possession ; because they then pre¬ 
vent acts of love. He may lose his property, horses, or 
fields of grain, but if he has been faithful, it can not 
interrupt his joy, for these calamities are among the 
infinity of causes and effects, and all action must be to 
him a manifestation of love. 

24 . It is selfish in man to seek for any personal pleas¬ 
ure or gratification. All personal pleasures are selfish 
attachments that prevent acts of love. He who has an 
attachment for any particular pleasure, would feel a priva¬ 
tion if that pleasure was denied ; and the care of a sick 
brother might give him pain, because it would take him 
from his dependent joys. 

25 . It is selfish to fear any thing. He who fears death 
is selfishly attached to life; he who fears the loss of 
reputation, property, or any result in the future, is 
selfishly attached to things or persons to whom he gives 
a preference. Fear will prevent acts of love. 

26 . It is selfish to teach that one method of educating 
man, or that one class of information is superior to 
another ; for no one is capable of judging of things infinite 
in their connections. One class of information becomes 
superior to another, and one method of educating 
better, through selfish attachments. 

27 . It is selfish in man to become attached to any 
opinions or truths. Whoever is afraid that his opinions 
shall be proved erroneous, has a selfish attachment for 
them. No two have the same conceptions of truth. 
What one being loves as truth, is never known in like 
manner to any other finite being. It is as selfish in man 
to form an attachment for any class of opinions, as to 
form an attachment to any of the conditions of life, 

3 


26 


SELFISHNESS. 


for houses, lands, money, fame, or horses; for they bring 
the same dependent joys. Man has not the same con¬ 
ceptions of truth in any two moments of time. If one 
has an attachment to any class of opinions, it will pre¬ 
vent him from doing acts of love, and from finding 
liberty. 

28. It is selfish in man to become attached to any class 
of duties. It may not be that man shall do what he wishes, 
or that any kind of toil, however beneficial it may be 
esteemed, shall be his to perform. Therefore, to form 
an attachment for any one class of duties, is no better 
than that of any other selfish love. If one has this attach¬ 
ment, he will neglect other duties and acts of love 
about him. Man should seek to perform those duties 
about him of which he has a conception, and 'which 
demand his care and attention. 

29. It is selfish in man to suppose that his opinion or 
belief is superior in one moment of time to that in another; 
or will ever be superior in any period of time to what 
it is at the present moment; or that it is now or ever 
will be superior to the opinion or belief of any other being 
that ever has or will exist. Man must follow his concep¬ 
tions of truth and duty in every period of time that he 
possesses them; but when he believes them to be supe¬ 
rior to that of any previous opinion held by himself or 
others, they are selfishly preferred; and if he believes 
that his present opinions are inferior to what thev will be 
in the future, he is selfishly degrading his present opin¬ 
ions, which are always for him to act from in the pres¬ 
ent moments of his existence. All beings in all periods 
of time have those opinions that are necessary in each 
moment of time ; if they do not, no one can have in any 



SELFISHNESS. 


27 


moment of time any opinion that is necessary; for if it 
is shown that man does not believe what he should in 
one moment of time, he never can do so, because he has 
only his conceptions in each moment of time to tell him 
what to believe. Man has no means of proving that 
any one belief is superior or inferior to that of another, 
except through the adoption of some standard, which 
standard he cannot show to be true or false. 

30. It is selfish in man to suppose that his position in 
society or his condition will ever be superior in any one 
period of time to what it is in another ; or that his con¬ 
dition is now or ever will be superior to that of any 
other being who ever has or will exist. Man can only 
esteem one condition superior to another through a self¬ 
ish attachment. As an act of love, he may assume one 
condition or position in society, but he should form no 
attachment for it; for an act of love may also require him 
to leave that condition. Man can not say that his con¬ 
dition is superior to that of the most degraded ; if he 
does, he is presuming that one condition is more or¬ 
dained ,* and if one condition in life is more ordained 
than another, no condition in any period of time is or¬ 
dained ; for no being has the same position or condition 
in different moments of time. Man should strive to give 
to himself and others love; but is he doing this when 
he says to others that his own condition is superior to 
theirs, and thus endeavoring to teach them to seek a new 
condition of selfish love ? It is as selfish in man to suppose 
that any future condition will be superior to the one he 
now occupies, as to suppose that his present condition is 
superior or inferior to any condition of the past; or to 
suppose that riches are better than poverty, or fame bet- 


28 


SELFISHNESS. 


ter than obscurity. Man, through his own selfishness, 
should not see infinite action with favorite persons and 
conditions in any period of time. No two beings have 
the same conceptions of what would be the best condi¬ 
tion ; and every one’s superior condition is changing in 
every moment of time ; therefore, to call one condition 
superior to another is a selfish love and a dependent joy. 

31. It is selfish in man to suppose that any one being 
is more an instrument of God, to do his will, to give 
truth, or to do good, thau any other being that ever has 
or will exist in any period of time. A finite being 
judges that one does more than another on account of 
his selfish condition ; he sees one as doing good and an¬ 
other evil; he sees one man as doing nothing, and an¬ 
other as a great worker; he sees one as producing an 
effect which is mighty in results, and another without 
any results ; but every action that takes place, is the re¬ 
sult of an infinity of causes, and produces an infinity of 
effects which can never be known to finite beings. Man 
can not truly say that any one action is greater in its re¬ 
sults than another ; or that any number of good acts have 
produced any more good than the same number of evil 
acts ; or that a thousand good or evil acts have resulted 
in more than one good or evil act; because all things 
are infinite in their connections, and he cannot under¬ 
stand them. It is selfishness in man that causes him to 
say that one man has done more in the service of God 
than another, for he cannot judge infinity and say that 
one has found God’s truth and does God’s works more 
than his fellows. 

32. It is selfish in man to suppose that he is inferior 
or less loved by God, than any other being that ever has or 


SELFISHNESS. 


29 


will exist in any period of time. If man calls himself 
inferior, he has a selfish attachment to some standard 
that he calls superior ; if he supposes himself less loved 
by God, it is on account of a selfish attachment to con¬ 
ditions which he thinks superior to the one in which he 
is placed. 

33. It is selfish in man to suppose that angels, ser¬ 
aphs, Jesus Christ, Paul, the prophets, or any other 
beings in the future world, or in any place in the uni¬ 
verse, are superior to any one who ever has or will ex¬ 
ist in any period of time. Man should not exalt the an¬ 
cient dead, or beings he supposes to live in the future 
world ; for all in every moment of time possess what is 
appointed for them, and he has no means of proving 
that one being is superior to another. It is only through 
the selfish feelings that man*can see one being superior 
to another. It is impossible for any finite being to judge, 
because one possesses what another does not, that the 
one is superior, because his conceptions are finite 
of things infinite in their connections. Man can not 
say that the angels do more the w r ork of God than 
the most degraded beings on the earth, or that they are 
superior to the most degraded beings in the future 
world, except through his selfish feelings ; for he has no 
means of knowing that it is so, and his faith in love 
should tell him that no partiality is manifested by the in¬ 
finity of action. 

34. It is selfish in man to suppose that he is superior 
or inferior to God. Man can not prove that he is infe¬ 
rior to infinity, or that he is not himself God; or that he 
is not the author of everything that ever has or will 
take place in all periods of time past and future; nei- 


3* 


30 


SELFISHNESS. 


ther can lie prove that lie is the author of any act that 
ever has or will take place. There is no method of 
proving that anything that exists is not God, and is not 
the cause of every action that ever has or will take place. 
If man can prove that he is less than infinity, he can find 
infinity; and to find infinity, he must learn that he is 
himself infinite. Man, to his consciousness may be ca¬ 
pable of producing an action, but he cannot prove that 
the results of that action are less or superior to any 
other action in the universe; neither can he prove that 
they are less or superior to all the combined action of 
infinity ; neither can he prove that he or any being 
of whom he has a knowledge or conception, is the author 
of any action that takes place in any period of time. 
Therefore, to call any being superior or inferior to him¬ 
self, is an act of selfishness.' Man should have faith that 
his condition in every moment of time is the condition 
for him; and he should have the same faith for every 
being. 

35. It is selfish in man to suppose that he is superior 
or inferior to the animal, vegetable, or mineral creation, 
or to any thing that ever has or will exist in any period. 
When man degrades or exalts himself without any 
cause, it is a selfish act. Man can not show that he ex¬ 
erts more control than the insect or the spear of grass. 
There is no method of ascertaining that he is inferior, or 
superior, or more cared for, or less loved, than any thing 
of which he has a knowledge. 

O 

36. It is- selfish in man to suppose that any one action 
that ever took place, is more in harmony with the laws 
of nature or God than another. It is as selfish in man 
to suppose that any course of prescribed action is supe- 


SELFISHNESS. 


31 


rior to any other, as to suppose that a condition of 
wealth or pleasure is superior to other conditions. He 
may suppose, from observation and facts that come to 
his consciousness, that a certain course is preferable, and 
call that the course of nature; but never until he un¬ 
derstands infinity, will he know what nature is. If one 
act is not in harmony with nature, then no act is in har- 
with nature ; for if one act is in harmony with nature 
and another not, a method has been found by which a 
finite being can understand infinity, which is the same 
as saying that infinity is limited, which can not be 
proved. The selfish feelings of man may lead him to 
prefer or call superior any course of action, but he 
should know that his conceptions are unlike that of any 
other being, and he should not call his views nature 
any more than the views of another. Neither can the 
observations of any class of persons be called nature or 
natural more than that of others. The regular recur¬ 
rences of vegetable or animal growth, in stated periods 
of time, to the consciousness of man, are no more na¬ 
ture than are any other events that come to his con¬ 
sciousness. Man has no means of showing that regular 
or irregular recurrences are any more after the laws of 
God or nature than any thing else. 

37. It is selfish in man to teach that God controls 
every thing by laws, or that he does not control every 
thing by laws. When man asserts that God or nature 
operates by fixed laws, he must suppose himself ac¬ 
quainted with some of those laws; and if he asserts the 
opposite, he must suppose himself to know, while no 
finite being can know whether God or nature operates 
by any laws or not. If man can discover any law by 


32 


SELFISHNESS. 


which nature or God acts, he must be himself infinite, 
All that man knows of infinite action, is that action that 
comes to his consciousness in moments of time, which 
conceptions of action are different in all beings. When 
he calls his conceptions or observations the laws of na¬ 
ture or the laws of God, he has done nothing more 
than to exalt his opinions. 

38. It is selfish in man to suppose that God is the 
author of all that he calls good; and that he or some 
other being is the author of all that he calls evil. If 
man can prove that any event is not the action of infin¬ 
ity, he can prove that there is no infinite action ; for 
every action is an effect from an infinity of causes; and 
he can trace one effect no more than another, and know 
from wdience it originated. Therefore, if it can be 
shown that God is not the author of any one action, it 
can be shown that God is not infinite action. God can 
not be shown to be the author of one action more than 
another. Man calls those actions evil which produce 
effects that he dislikes. Another being may call the 
effects good, and consequently call the action good. 
Man should not judge the motives that have caused any 
action, for evil may result from an act of love, and good 
from an act of selfishness to his consciousness. It is 
impossible for man to say whether evil or good has pro¬ 
duced more of those effects which make the conditions 
that he loves most. In applying all that he calls good 
to God, he exalts an imaginary being of selfish prefer¬ 
ence, whom he can no more prove to be God then any 
other imaginary or real existence. His imaginary God 
must become to him an object of selfish attachment; for 
he seeks that this God may do for him every thing that 


SELFISHNESS. 


33 


he calls good, while his conceptions of good are unlike 
the conceptions of any other being. Man exalts his 
God through a love of conditions. He expects his good 
God will give to him those conditions which he prefers, 
and that the actions he calls evil will cease to produce 
those conditions which he dislikes. 

39. It is selfish to pray to God. It would not be 
selfish to ask God for any thing, presuming it to be a 
good, providing man had no selfish attachment for the 
effect, and providing he did not suppose God to be 
superior to himself. Man has no means of proving 
that one being in the universe can do more for him than 
another ; and therefore for him to petition any one being 
in preference to another for all that he desires, is an act 
of selfishness. Man, in praying to God because he sup¬ 
poses him to be the ruler of the universe, must do so 
through an attachment to effects which he supposes so 
powerful a being must be capable of producing. 

Man can not pray to God to make him purer and bet¬ 
ter than he now is, except through his selfish feelings. 
Man must have a conception of the thing for which he 
asks ; for it is impossible for him to seek for any thing 
of which he has no conception. Man can not pray for 
love, or that he may leave his selfish attachments; for 
that love he has faith in he possesses in the present mo¬ 
ment of his faith. If he believes that any selfish at¬ 
tachment prevents joy, he leaves that attachment in the 
moment of his faith. Hence, if man prays for any thing 
in the future, he must pray for some selfish love, be¬ 
cause it is only the objects of selfish love that can be 
dependent. The moment man has a conception of any 
purity beyond himself, he possesses that purity in that 


34 


SELFISHNESS. 


moment, if he believes it to be joy. Man loves in every 
moment of time after bis faith. 

40. It is selfish to praise or worship God, to dedicate 
buildings or ordain men to his service. It will injure 
man to praise God as much as to praise his neighbor; 
and no worship, praise, or service can be rendered to 
any being, except for selfish purposes on the part of 
those rendering it. The act of worship is the same, 
whether done to make man better or because God is 
supposed to be in need of praise ; it is only shifting the 
act between God and man. Man becomes better only 
through love ; but his impersonation of his highest con¬ 
ceptions, which is his God, becomes to him an object of 
selfish love, when he attempts to do any thing in order 
to give that being pleasure, or to seek in any way his 
own or others preferment. If man can give his God 
any more pleasure by one act of his life than by another, 
his God is finite and has his favorites. It is selfish in 
man to suppose that he is loved by God more than 
another, or more cared for ; and for him to think of 
pleasing God by any thing he can do, is presuming to 
favoritism. To dedicate a building to God, is to sup¬ 
pose that he is more in one locality than another; and 
to ordain men to the service of God, is presuming that 
one man knows more of him than another, which can 
not be proved. 

41. It is* selfish to ask God to forgive, remit, or 
cover past acts. The acts of man are not unpleasant for 
him to think about, except through selfish attachments ; 
and he cannot prove that one act of his life has done 
more for him than another. It is the same selfishness 
that causes man to ask God to forgive some acts, that 


SELFISHNESS. 


35 


causes him to remember and tell of other acts. All the 
acts of life should be permitted to come to the mind of 
man, to give him strength to leave his selfishness. 
Man wishes some acts to be forgiven, or, as he sup¬ 
poses, blotted out, because he wishes selfishly to escape 
their effect, or selfishly to be away from the trouble of 
their conflicting with his present loves. But the more 
he will look at those acts, and strive to see in them a 
manifestation of love, he will be the better able to discover 
his selfish loves. Man does not ask God to forgive his 
acts, except he feels that they make him unhappy. If 
man is unhappy in any condition, he should see joy in 
that condition, instead of trying to escape it for another ; 
for freedom cannot be dependent on conditions. 

42 . It is selfish to attach any more reverence, sacred¬ 
ness, or awe, to the being of God, men, or the Bible, 
than to any thing else. The same selfishness that causes 
man to venerate great names and to esteem one of his 
fellows as superior to the multitude, causes him to exalt 
that being wTrich he calls God. Nothing can be exalted 
or degraded in any one’s mind, except through selfish¬ 
ness. Should the poor exalt the rich because they feel 
dependent on them ? Should the serf bow his knees 
to the tyrant, because he feels that the tyrant can 
deprive him of his home ? Must a governor be received 
with smiles, because he has many benefices to bestow ? 
These same selfish feelings cause man to exalt his God. 
He who calls any thing superior, is actuated by selfish 
motives. God is to every man a being of his conception ; 
so are all men and all things. Whatever it is that man 
exalts in his mind, he must do so through motives of 
interest and preferment. It is as selfish in man to exalt 


36 


SELFISHNESS. 






one thing as to exalt another. The person that refuses 
to call any man master, turns his selfish feelings in 
another course when he calls God his master. The 
God he calls master is an imaginary being of his con¬ 
ception, for no one knows anything of God. If any 
being should reveal himself to man, and say that he 
was exalted above the nations, it should be sufficient 
evidence to him that the being was not God. Is all 
that this universe contains superior to any one thing in 
it ? Man must love all ; and if he loves, he will see 
that he cannot exalt or degrade any thing. He who 
exalts or degrades, must at times be prevented from 
dcing acts of love ; for if he thinks one person super¬ 
ior to another, or the Bible superior to all other books, 
or his God exalted above every thing, any act of love 
that would interfere with this attachment he would 
refuse to p rform. No act of love can be prevented, 
except through a selfish attachment. 

43. It is selfish in man to feel dependent on God. 
It is as selfish in man to feel dependent on God as on 
individuals. If a man feels dependent on a person he 
dislikes, that dependence is irksome ; but if on a per¬ 
son in whom he has confidence, that dependence is not 
irksome, except through the fear of unavoidable changes ; 
therefore, he who feels dependent on any individual 
has an attachment that is dependent on circumstances 
for joy. Every man’s Gcd is a being of his conception, 
and consequently, a being that is constantly changing ; 
for everything to his consciousness is changing. Man’s 
dependence on the God of his conception may give 
him happiness in one moment, but in the next moment 
his God will not do what he expected, any more than 


SELFISHNESS. 


37 


individuals. Therefore, if he feels dependent on any 
God, it must be on the changeable God of his concep¬ 
tion. Therefore, to acknowledge a dependence on God 
or anything that exists, is a selfish and dependent joy. 

44. It is selfish in man to attach any attributes to God. 
Man, in giving attributes to God, applies his conceptions 
of goodness to an infinite being. Man has a knowledge 
of good, because he has a knowledge of evil; without 
the knowledge of one, he has no knowledge of the other ; 
therefore, all good with which man is acquainted, is a 
relative and dependent conception, known to him through 
actions which he calls evil and good. Man prefers in 
all moments of time what he calls good, which is the 
same as saying that he would avoid in all moments of 
time what he calls evil. When man would say that God 
is infinite in goodness, he makes an assertion of an infi¬ 
nite being, through his finite and dependent conceptions, 
which come to his consciousness through actions which 
he calls good and evil. If man asserts that God is infi¬ 
nite in goodness, he the same as says that God is con¬ 
stantly avoiding an infinite amount of evil; for man’s 
conception of infinite goodness, which he applies to God, 
arises in consequence of his seeking the good and avoid¬ 
ing the evil. Man has no conception of any attribute, 
except it is dependent, and when he npplies one of his 
conceptions to an infinite being, he is no more than exalt¬ 
ing, that one he esteems the best; while the effects of 
infinite action that come to his knowledge, show him that 
he has only a conception of this in consequence of a de¬ 
pendence on something he dislikes. Man is only educated 
to his highest conceptions of love, except through a dis¬ 
like of conditions that are imposed on him in consequence 


38 


SELFISHNESS. 


of actions lie calls selfish. When man says that God is 
infinite in love, the assertion means no more than his high¬ 
est conception of what God is ; and it is the same when 
he gives any other attribute to God. As all the concep¬ 
tions of man are dependent, any attributes that he may 
apply to God are also dependent. Therefore, when 
man attaches any attributes to God, he does so through 
an act of selfishness. 

45. It is selfish to teach that there are one or three 
Gods. All that man knows of God is from the changes 
that take place to his consciousness. When he asserts 
that there is one God, he says that all changes spring 
from one cause; when he asserts that there are three 
Gods, he says that all changes spring from three causes ; 
while he has no means of ascertaining whether the changes 
of creation arise from one, three, or an infinity of causes. 
Therefore, to say that there are one or three Gods, is a 
selfish and dependent conception of man. 

46. It is selfish to teach That God has established a 
moral government on the earth or in the future world. To 
show that God has established a government, it must be 
shown that God has established laws by which that gov¬ 
ernment is controlled ; and to show that laws have been 
given, it must be shown that man can do something con¬ 
trary to God’s wishes, which can not be proved. 

Every divine, religious, or moral law, of which man 
may have a conception, he has no means of proving to 
be such, except through his own preferences, which are 
changing in every moment of time. Therefore to teach 
that God has established a moral government any where 
or at any time, is a selfish and dependent conception of 


man. 


S E L F I S II N E S S. 


39 


47. It is selfish in man to believe or teach that there 
is a God. Man acts from faith, — he is induced to act, 
because he believes that it will bring joy ; which is the 
same as saying that certain conditions coming about him, 
he will act in a certain manner. In order to prove that 
there is a God, man must prove him to be a being act¬ 
ing through faith, for he can have no conception of a 
being acting from sight, — acting without any previous 
or posterior cause for acting; and to show that God acts 
by faith, is to show that he is finite. God, to be the author 
of any thing after the conception of man, is to say that 
God acts through faith. If man says that God made the 
world, he must say that God had some previous or poste¬ 
rior cause for making it, which is the same as say¬ 
ing that God is not acquainted with the infinity of 
causes and effects. Man has no means of proving that 
there is a God, except through effects. He discovers 
worlds, and on them trees, animals, and men ; and the 
only proof he has of God, is to say that God made them ; 
and he is only led to make this assertion, because to his 
own consciousness he is himself capable of produ¬ 
cing effects. Therefore, man’s conception of God is of 
a being that produces every thing, excepting what he 
is himself the author ; and he can have no other con¬ 
ception of God’s doing any thing, excepting after the 
manner of his doing it, believing it to be good, — cer¬ 
tain conditions coming about him, causing him to act 
in a certain manner. 

Man can not go from effect to cause and find God, 
or from cause to effect ; for no one cause or effect 
shows God any more than another. Man has no means 
of discovering that one action is more the action of God 


40 


SELFISHNESS. 


than another ; he may suppose that he has discovered 
some manner in which God worked ; but he can only dis¬ 
cover a few effects from an infinity of effects and causes ; 
and if he should learn a million of effects, he would 
know no more of the infinity of effects, than if he did 
not know a_ single cause and effect. 

Man can not prove that any action that he may dis¬ 
cover is the action of God ; for in doing this, he must 
attribute the action to some one or a number of separate 
existences, which he can find no proof for doing ; 
because in finding proofs, he will always go from effects 
to causes or causes to effects, which will increase to his 
consciousness the more he has faculties developed to dis¬ 
cover them. 

To say that God is a spirit, is no more than to say that 
God is God, or to make any other assertion of which 
man has no knowledge. 

Man can not show there is a God on account of any 
regular recurrences of events or actions that come to his 
consciousness ; or on account of the manifestations of 
love or selfishness, good or evil, which arise to his con¬ 
ception in consequence of events or actions. All the 
conceptions of good and evil that man has, arise in con¬ 
sequence of the regular and irregular actions that come 
to his knowledge. When he says that all or any action 
shows an over-ruling power, or a first cause, he makes 
an assertion, that some one ought to be the author of 
the effects that arise to his consciousness, which he has 
no means of proving. Therefore, to believe or to teach 
that there is a God, is selfish and dependent. 

48. It is selfish to teach that man is a moral agent, 
or that any being is accountable. To say that man is a 


SELFISHNESS. 


41 


moral agent or accountable, is to presume that be is ac¬ 
quainted with some rule or law of infinite action to which 
he should conform, which it is impossible to prove. It 
is impossible for man to do different than to seek his joy ; 
and it is in consequence of the result of his seeking, that 
he learns of selfishness and love, or that he has a con¬ 
science. To say that man should know better than to 
violate his conscience, or to act in a selfish manner, is 
to judge over the infinity of causes and effects in all pe¬ 
riods, and to presume that they are not correct. Man 
should do always as he does do, and in this w^ay he may 
learn that his conscience is his joy, and consequently 
learn how to be free. 

49. It is selfish in man to pledge himself to any sect, 
creed, party, laws, rules, resolutions, or to support any 
organization of society; because, by so doing he pledges 
himself to believe or do in a future moment of time what 
he conceives to be right in the present moment, thus at¬ 
taching himself to authority. 

50. It is selfish in man to pledge himself to any so¬ 
ciety, that he will abstain from doing or that he will do 
anything whatever. It is selfish in man to pledge him¬ 
self to a society or to any being that he will do right; 
for in doing so he pledges himself to his finite conception 
of what is right, which he cannot do without attaching 
himself to authority for future guidance, which is selfish. 

51. It is selfish in man to join any church, society, or 
organization of men. It is selfish in man to say that he will 
do in the future what he thinks is right; for he must do 
in all moments of time what he supposes will give him 
joy ; and in doing this he may do what he does not think 
is right. In joining a society, man renders himself ac- 


4* 


42 


SELFISHNESS. 


countable to a pledge given in one moment of time, and 
this accountability supposes that it was possible for him 
not to do what he supposed would bring to him joy. Man, 
in seeking joy, learns what is liberty. Man may, as an 
act of love, act with an organization of men in one mo¬ 
ment, but to say that he shall do so in any future moment 
is an act of selfishness. 

52 . It is selfish to practice or to teach the practice of 
patience, self-denial, or self-sacrifice. To teach the prac¬ 
tice of these, man must suppose selfish attachments allow¬ 
able, because they can only be exercised through selfish 
desires. Would man, in doing a kindness, forego some 
selfish attachment which to him is a pleasure ? Without 
this selfish attachment he would not see the necessity of 
patience, self-denial, or self-sacrifice. All of these arise in 
consequence of selfish feelings; and the exercise of 
them are acts of selfishness ; for they are acts of grief 
or sorrow over lost pleasures or conditions. When 
man acts from his love, without any selfish feelings to 
give him grief, he is free. To teach the necessity 
of self-sacrifice, is to teach that selfishness is allow¬ 
able. 

53. It is selfish to teach that one being ought to for¬ 
give another. Man, in order to forgive another, must 
suppose that some unnecessary act has been done; and 
he can find no reason for saying that one act is more 
unnecessary than another ; and hence it is selfish in him 
to select any of the acts of the past, and say what were 
necessary and what unnecessary. Man, to forgive 
another, should be able to show that the act was unne¬ 
cessary ; and to show this, he must be capable of under¬ 
standing the infinity of causes and effects. 


SELFISHNESS. 


43 


In forgiving, man presumes to judge, which is also an 
act of selfishness. 

In forgiving, it is also presumed that a condition of 
hatred or dislike is allowable; for man can only see 
the necessity of forgiving, except by justifying the dis¬ 
like which he leaves in the act of forgiving, while the 
dislike is an act of selfishness. To teach that God can 
forgive, is to teach that God has likes and dislikes. 
Therefore, to teach that any being can or should forgive 
another is selfish. 

54. It is selfish to teach that man should have char¬ 
ity towards others of different beliefs, or towards indi¬ 
viduals of fallen conditions; because by so doing, he 
supposes that his belief or condition is superior, which he 
cannot prove except through selfishness. When man 
loves, irrespective of condition or beliefs, he is free. 

55. It is selfish to teach that society or men do or 
can exist with antagonistical interests. No person can 
show that any one has an interest conflicting with his 
own, except he is in a selfish condition. When a man 
says that he must go out of society to exist, he the same 
as says that his selfish feelings conflict with those about 
him, and that he would seek a condition where his self¬ 
ish desires can be gratified. The. one that feels that 
his interest is antagonistic to that of another, has an 
attachment for dependent joys, and is supposing that 
some condition or circumstances shall make him happy. 

56. It is selfish to suppose that men can be more in 
a harmonial relation in one moment than in another; or 
that any beings are more in harmonial relations than 
others. If man can act more in harmony in one mo¬ 
ment than another, he can never act in harmony in any 


44 


SELFISHNESS. 


moment; for the knowledge of the want of harmony is 
equivalent to the knowledge that he can never obtain it; 
for he never can learn that he knows more of infinite 
action in one moment than in another, and consequently 
will never know that he is nearer to a harmonial relation. 
Man, in supposing that he shall act more in harmony 
in a future moment, supposes that outward and depend¬ 
ent conditions shall bring this harmony ; for in that 
future he is led to expect all persons about him will 
do after his present finite conception of harmony. No 
more harmony can be proved in people’s acting and 
thinking alike, than there is in their doing the opposite. 
There is as much harmony in the condition of two 
neighbors that hate as in two that love ; for one is as 
much an appointed condition as the other, and as de¬ 
pendent; and man has no conception of one without 
the other. That condition in which men love is a de¬ 
pendent condition; it is only the joy that arises from 
love that is not dependent. One man may love, and 
another hate his brother, — both are in the same depend¬ 
ent condition, and their acts in the same harmony ; for 
the acts and thoughts of one are as dependent as those 
of the other. This takes place while one is in joy and 
the other in misery. There are no actions, thoughts, 
or conditions, but are as dependent in one being as in ano¬ 
ther. To say that any beings are more in harmonial 
relations, is no more than to suppose them to act and 
think in unison, which conditions are as dependent as 
any others that can be named. Man has no means of 
determining that any act or thought, from any source, is 
more in harmony with his fellow beings than another. 
Love may cause men to act in unison ; but to give any 


SELFISHNESS. 


45 


precedence to acts thus made, is to say that the combined 
action of men does more good than other acts, which 
man has no means of showing. It is selfishness that 
causes man to exalt any one action above another, by 
saying that it is more in harmony, or that it does more 
good. Man can not go out of a harmonial relation to 
do any thing. 

57. It is selfish in man to be attached to any indivi¬ 
duals. Every attachment is dependent on some selfish 
feeling or desire. Man and wife may become attached 
to each other through the desire of indulgence, or through 
the mutual dependence they exercise towards each other 
in consequence of the separate duties they have assumed. 
But it is selfish in man to feel dependent on his wife, 
and it is selfish in the wife to depend on her husband. 
Man and wife should do all they can as acts of love, 
•with reference to themselves and others, in order to be 
faithful in the present moments of existence ; but they 
can not always assist each other; therefore, if they have 
any attachments, they must meet with disappointments. 
Man can not prefer his wife and children except through 
a selfish attachment. He should be faithful with respect 
to them, as they are objects placed in his care ; but, in 
preferring them in preference to others for any condition, 
he manifests an attachment that will interfere with acts 
of love. Man can not love one being more than another ; 
and what he calls a superior love is a selfish attachment. 
The causes are innumerable that give rise to selfish at¬ 
tachments between individuals. Man may say that he 
has a superior love for his betrothed, wife, or friend, but 
the superiority arises through his selfish feelings. Man, 
in loving one because he is trusty, and in hating another 


46 


SELFISHNESS. 


because lie deceives, is selfish in both instances. The 
same selfishness is exhibited in likes as in dislikes. If 
man loves another on account of the relative condition in 
which both are placed, that love is as selfish as any other 
feeling he can manifest. If man can not love those who 
hate him, his joys are all dependent; for any love that 
will not embrace enemies is selfish; for the betrothed, 
wife, or friends, may all become enemies. Man can not 
love his friend and hate his enemy; for in hating his en¬ 
emy, he shows that he has no love but a selfish attach¬ 
ment. Man’s selfish attachment to a person he calls his 
friend, results in consequence of the selfish feelings of 
both flowing in the same channel, or in the exercise of 
some kind of dependence which one or both may have 
for the other. It is impossible for man to exercise any 
dependence anywhere except as an act of selfishness ; 
for he has no method of proving that he is dependent on 
anything, and any exercise of it must produce a selfish 
feeling. 

58. It is selfish to become attached to any rules, laws, 
or manners established by society, or to suppose them 
superior now to what they were in the past, for no supe¬ 
riority can be proved. Man may act with society,—con¬ 
form to her rules, but it is selfish to become attached to 
her methods of acting ; for it. is a dependent joy. 

59. It is selfish to become attached to any of the rules 
of composition, or the methods of acquiring knowledge 
prescribed by the learned or society ; for no one stand¬ 
ard that is adopted can be shown to be superior to an¬ 
other except through a selfish attachment. 

60. It is selfish to teach that there is any progression 
or reform taking place ; for he who assumes that there is 


SELFISHNESS. 


47 


reform, assumes that his adopted standard is more correct 
than that of others, which he has no method of proving. 
All believe what they should in every moment of time; 
and that being that can show that his standard or belief 
is superior' can show that no beings should believe what 
they do or will in any moment of time in the past or fu¬ 
ture. Man can never have anything bufr his conceptions 
in the present moments of existence to tell him what 
to believe ; and to show that they are not reliable in one 
moment, is to show that they are never reliable. If one 
learns any fact that he did not previously know, is it pro¬ 
gression ? If man leaves an organization of men, is it 
progression ? If man learns that God will save all men, 
is it progression ? If man learns that he can talk with 
the dead, is it progression ? Do progression and reform 
teach love ? Love destroj^s them. Selfish attachments 
can find the progressive and conservative, the reformer 
and the one who would stay progress, the elected few 
and the cast off, the righteous and the damned; but 
love cannot find them. It is through an attachment to 
some standard, that man is led to say the world is growing 
better, or that the cause of truth is prospering. Man can 
not show any other proof, that his standard is superior to 
another, only that it is his conception, and the concep¬ 
tion of all who believe it. It is not progression because 
he has recently adopted it, or because he is changing his 
belief in every moment of time. Man can not say that 
he is progressing because he has changed his belief, or 
because any class of people have done the same. In as¬ 
serting that he is progressing he merely asserts a selfish 
attachment to his changes of belief. This selfish attach¬ 
ment is always retarding his love ; for what he calls pro-. 


48 


SELFISHNESS. 


gression, being his opinion, he is ready to fight for it, 
calling it truth ; and also ready to produce contention and 
dislike among others according to the strength of his 
selfish feelings. Man should see that what he calls 
truth is never the same truth to any other being, and 
should, therefore, learn that his conceptions of truth are 
limited. Love does not know any distinctions, does not 
see the righteous and the damned, hell and heaven, the 
progressive and the conservative, the superstitious and 
the enlightened age; it sees objects to love and knows 
no preferences. 

61. It is selfish in man to teach that truth shall 
triumph, and that error shall cease. Man, in asserting 
that truth shall triumph, is led to suppose that some 
man’s conceptions of truth will eventually be believed 
by all. Therefore, to say that truth shall triumph, is 
to say that some finite conception of truth shall be 
believed, or to say that some finite being shall under¬ 
stand infinity, and then tell what is truth; both of 
which are impossible ; for a finite being can not under¬ 
stand infinity, and no being can ever know that he is 
nearer the truth at one time than at another. Man has a 
knowledge of truth through a conception of error, and 
one will triumph as much as the other ; for both are 
relative and dependent conceptions in all beings. 

62 . It is selfish to teach that man is a free agent, or that 
he could do different from what he did, or can do different 
in the future from what he is to do. If every thing man 
does and is to do was not imperative upon him, he would 
not be a conscious being, because all his conceptions 
arise through imperative actions. To say that man does 
not seek joy in every conscious moment, is to say that 


SELFISHNESS. 


49 


man can leave all finite conceptions ; for what he sees 
as joy in every moment of time is imperative. Through 
this imperative action he becomes conscious of relative 
attributes, selfishness and love, good and evil. He must 
do what his conceptions tell him will bring to him joy. 
But take away this necessity of action, and he ceases to 
his own consciousness to exist; for, to be able to do dif¬ 
ferent from what he does, he must not be guided by any 
previous or posterior actions or conditions, which must 
make him unconscious or beyond finite conceptions. 

Man likes the teachings of free agency, through a 
selfish attachment to penalties. No one can be pun¬ 
ished unless he is supposed to be accountable ; and to 
be accountable, he must be a free agent. No action and 
its results can be shown to be unnecessary in the infinity 
of action ; for if one action can be proved unnecessary, 
it proves all action unnecessary, for all acts are infinite 
in their connections. 

Man also likes the teachings of free agency, through 
a selfish attachment to some anticipated joy or condition 
in the future. He wishes to believe, through an inde¬ 
pendent power in himself, that some pleasure is possible— 
that heaven can be gained or lost — which are selfish 
anticipations; for the pleasure of heaven may or may 
not come. 

Man also likes the teachings of free angency, through 
selfish attachments to conditions ; and he supposes these 
conditions are attainable through actions that are under 
his control; while all attachments to conditions are sel¬ 
fish — one condition is dependent as another among all 
conditions known among finite beings. 

Free agency leads man to a selfish fear and distrust 
6 


50 


SELFISHNESS. 


respecting all actions that take place. Man may do an 
act of love, and the result to his consciousness be evil; 
in this instance he must accuse himself of a want of 
foresight, and must consequently be led to believe that 
freedom will consist in his becoming sufficiently enlight¬ 
ened to know how to act, and evil not be the result; 
while it will be impossible for him ever to know any 
more of causes and effects than he does now ; and he 
never will be able to weigh the effects of any one action 
of his life, to know that it does more evil or good than 
another. All murmuring, quarrelling, contentions, and 
accusing of faults, arise in consequence of supposed ac¬ 
countability ; and this accountability supposes that man 
has the power of doing different from what he does, and 
also supposes that some standard adopted by one or a class 
of men is unchangeable and perfect; while no stand¬ 
ard can be proved to be true. Every judgment rendered 
of actions, with reference to any accountability, is an act 
of selfishness; for to prefer one act in preference to 
another, and say that it does more evil or good, 
when there is no means of knowing that it is so, gives 
rise to a selfish and dependent joy. 

The teaching of free agency leads man to see some 
to be liked and others to be disliked. He will like 
those who conform to his standard, and dislike those who 
do not. Man can find no method of loving one person 
as another, if he believes his enemies could do different 
from what they do. Man must see his friends as supe¬ 
rior to his enemies, unless he believes in imperative ac¬ 
tion ; and he has no method of showing that any one 
being is superior to another. If man exalts any action 
above another, he must do so through a selfish feeling, 


SELFISHNESS. 


51 


and in exalting the action, he must exalt and become 
attached to the cause ; and he never can love what he 
calls inferior as he loves what he calls superior. To be 
free, man must be without selfish attachments, and love 
one as well as another. Therefore, to teach or believe 
that man is a free agent, is a selfish and dependent joy. 

63. It is selfish in man not to love his enemies. Man 
has no love beyond that of selfish attachments until he 
loves his enemies, or loves irrespective of condition or 
actions. He has no means of ascertaining that he loves 
those who persecute and defame him, except he feels 
that to toil and care for them is joy. Any other love 
than this is dependent and selfish ; for all friends may 
become enemies. 

64. It is selfish in man to toil for an enemy for the 
purpose of putting hot coals on his head or to bring to him 
any grief. It is as selfish in man to do this as it would be 
to work that he might become rich ; the result in both 
instances is looked upon as the reward for the toil. If 
man looks forward to results, his joys are dependent; for 
he does not know that he would be allowed to do any¬ 
thing for his enemies; and in toiling for them, he does 
not know what will be the result of that toil; for he 
may be scorned during all the moments of labor, and 
through the consequences of it have his name given to 
posterity as a traitor. He must toil for enemies, if per¬ 
mitted, because he loves them irrespective of any condi¬ 
tions or results. Man can act with reference to results ; 
but if it makes any difference to him whether the results 
take place, they become selfish attachments that will pre¬ 
vent acts of love. If man is selfishly attached to results 
in toiling for his enemies, and the anticipated results do 


52 


SE LFISHNESS . 


not follow, he is disappointed, and is likely to cease toil¬ 
ing for them. * 

65. It is selfish in man to expect joy from any of the 
changes of life. Man should see joy in the changes of 
life, but not because of them; if he does, he will be led 
to prefer conditions and moments in time. He can not 
say he will see joy in any one event more than another, 
without selfishness ; and it is also selfish to depend on 
any change for joy, because man does not know what 
that change will be, making it, therefore, dependent. 
Man must see joy in the changes of life, but his joy must 
arise from his love, and not from any changes. The 
changes which are constantly taking place with reference 
to all beings, he should have faith in as a manifestation 
of love ; but he should not confound the love thus shown 
to his consciousness with the changes or events of life, 
and hence be led selfishly to anticipate them. If man 
thinks one change of life is a manifestation of love, he 
should see love manifested in all changes ; for all are 
connected with each other. 

66. It is selfish in man to expect joy from any kind 
of labor. Man should see joy in all kinds of labor, be¬ 
cause he must love all in all conditions of labor in which 
they can be engaged. If he can not do this, he can not 
find freedom ; for if he can be called on to do or assist 
in giving strength to perform labor which he despises, he 
has a selfish preference that will prevent him from loving. 
Therefore, if there is any kind of labor which man dis¬ 
likes, he will be called on to find joy in doing it before 
he can be free. If man could be called on to do any 
thing, and he would be annoyed, he is in a selfish con¬ 
dition. 


SELFISHNESS. 


53 


67. It is selfish to teach that Christ died for the world. 
The death of Christ is recorded as an involuntary act, 
resulting from the enmity of those he would teach. To 
say that he died for the world is to make his death vol¬ 
untary, which is the same as saying that Christ decided 
that to live beyond a certain moment in time would be 
productive of evil. This makes his death the same as 
an act of suicide ; for all who take their own lives decide 
that to live longer to themselves is an evil. It is impossi¬ 
ble for any one to make this decision, except through 
some selfish feeling. 

To say that Christ could take his life on account of 
the good that would result, is to suppose that Christ was 
acquainted with the infinity of causes and effects in all 
periods of time, which is impossible. If one being can 
take his life, anticipating that good will be the result as 
an act of love, all beings can do the same, which ren¬ 
der all acts of suicide acts of love. Christ may have 
known that he should die at a given time, and therefore 
known that his death was necessary; but for him to 
give up his life at any moment, as a voluntary act of 
his own, would be an act of selfishness and of suicide. 
Christ’s death was necessary; but man cannot prove 
that the event was of more importance than any other 
event that ever has or will take place, or that it has 
done more good or evil. 

To teach that Christ died for the world, is to teach 
that the world is under obligations to Christ, while man 
can not suppose that he is under obligation to any one, 
without being selfish. An obligation implies that man 
has received something in trust, for which he must ren¬ 
der an account. Obligations also imply that there is an 


5* 


54 


SELFISHNESS. 


uncertainty whether they may be fulfilled; and there¬ 
fore to teach that any obligation is necessary to per¬ 
fect the joy of man, is to make that joy selfish and 
dependent. 

To teach that the world is under obligations to an 
event that took place at a given time, arises in conse¬ 
quence of a selfish attachment. To prefer any moments, 
any class of truths or events, and say that they are more 
necessary to the world than others, is to presume that 
man should know what the world should do in all 
periods. 

To teach that all men are under obligations to Christ, 
is to teach a selfish and dependent joy; because there 
is an uncertainty whether all men become acquainted 
with the fact that Christ died for them. 

To teach that all men are under obligations to Christ, 
is a selfish and dependent joy; because there is an un¬ 
certainty but there may be thousands of others who 
have died for the world in the same or in a similar man¬ 
ner, of which the world now has no record or account. 

To teach that all men are under obligations to Christ, 
is a selfish and dependent joy; for there is an uncer¬ 
tainty what that obligation is, and no two can have the 
same opinion respecting it. 

To teach that all are under obligations to Christ, is a 
selfish and dependent joy; because the standard to 
which men are supposed to be accountable was conceived 
of by finite beings; and consequently is changing in 
every moment of time. 

To teach that all men are under obligations to Christ, 
is selfish; because the standard of obligations must be 
received on authority. 


55 


\ 

SELFISHNES'S. 

It is selfish to teach that men are under obligations to 
Christ; because it makes necessary to their joy an event 
in the past, and also supposes they will have an account 
to render in the future, which takes their attention from 
the present moments and duties of life, which should 
claim their care as acts of love. 

68. It is selfish to teach that Christ is a mediator be¬ 
tween God and man. To show the necessity of a mediator 
between an infinite and a finite being, is to show that the 
infinite being is finite; for to reconcile man to an infi¬ 
nite actor, it is implied that man is not in the condition 
as an effect to some cause commencing with that infinite 
actor in whicn he should be, which is an impossibility. 

A mediator implies that man is in an imperfect con¬ 
dition ; while he will never have any means of knowing 
whether he is in a better condition in one moment of 
time than in another; or that he can do any act in the 
future that will accomplish any more good or evil than 
what he has already done ; and therefore to show that 
man is in an imperfect condition, is to show that he must 
always remain so. 

A mediator implies that man can have a conception of 
a perfect standard of purity and love ; while it is impos¬ 
sible for man to have a conception of any standard that 
he can prove to be either true or false. 

To say that Christ is a mediator, is to say that Christ 
knows more of an infinite being than any one else, which 
man has no means of proving; for to understand infi¬ 
nity, Christ must himself be infinite, which is impossible; 
for two infinites can not exist. Therefore, to teach that 
Christ is a mediator between God and man is selfish. 

69. It is selfish to teach that any men or books are 


56 


SELFISHNESS. 


inspired by God. Those men or books that are supposed 
to be inspired must become objects of selfish attachment; 
and this attachment will prevent acts of love. There is 
an uncertainty whether the inspired men or books will be 
understood or heard of, making it always a dependent 
and selfish joy. There is no method by which inspira¬ 
tion can be proved ; and to teach it is selfish; for who¬ 
ever receives it must do so on authority, and hence be¬ 
come incapacitated from using his own conceptions to 
find liberty; which if he does not use, he must always 
remain in bondage. Men have been led to call many of 
their fellow beings and their writings inspired, through 
a selfish attachment to the truths they taught ; which 
attachment has determined them to teach the same to 
others, supposing them to be equally as necessary for all 
to believe as for themselves. To say that any truths 
are inspired because they are superior to any other 
truths taught, is to suppose that man can understand an 
infinite action, and thus enable him to judge. Man sees 
one truth as superior to another on account of his rela¬ 
tive condition, and from a finite and changeable concep¬ 
tion. No truth is inspired because it is new, or was 
never heard of previous to the time it was given to the 
world; for there are but few beings but what can say 
something that will be new to others. 

In accepting the inspiration of men or books on au¬ 
thority, one has no method of proving that any authority 
exercised over him is erroneous ; and to prefer one hind 
of authority in preference to others is selfish ; for man 
has no means of knowing that the authority of Christ or 
the Bible is superior to any ecclesiastical or other au¬ 
thority now claimed among men. To say that any men 


SELFISHN ESS. 


57 


or books are inspired, is the same as saying that all men 
and books are inspired, or that all men and books are not 
inspired ; for whoever are inspired by God have found a 
method by which they can approach infinity; and if 
they can approach infinity, they must be themselves infin¬ 
ite, and all beings that ever have or will exist must be 
infinite in the same degree to understand those that are 
inspired, or those that are inspired must remain as inac¬ 
cessible as the present infinity; hence, always unknown. 
Therefore, either all men and books are inspired, or all 
men and books are not inspired. 

70. It is selfish in man to become attached to any par¬ 
ticular method of gaining his living ; for the changes of 
life may require him to gain his living by other means ; 
and if he has an attachment to one method, it will prevent 
acts of love, and bring disappointments. 

71. It is selfish in man to decide to devote his time 
or life in spreading his opinions or conceptions of truth 
to the world. Man should only give his conceptions of 
truth as an act of love ; but when he would devote his 
time in spreading his belief, it becomes an act of selfish¬ 
ness ; for he then supposes that his belief is superior to 
that of others, which he has no means of showing; and 
also supposes that others should believe as himself, which 
can not be. The doing of one thing to all persons can 
not be an act of love ; but the doing of any one thing 
becomes an act of love when there is a demand for it. 
If a man would devote all his time to the spread of his 
opinions, although he may seek to do so where he can 
find a demand, it is selfish ; for in seeking for the de¬ 
mand he must pass by acts of love ; and he can not prove 
that one act of love is superior to another except through 


58 


SELFISHNESS. 


a selfish attachment. A man who would devote his life 
or time to the spread of his opinions, is in the same self¬ 
ish condition as a nation that would extend her territory 
by any means that is supposed allowable. Man should 
give no preferences to any methods of doing good, but be 
faithful with respect to every thing about him, as an act 
of love. He can not prove that one act of love is superior 
to another; and he can not refrain from any act of love 
calling on him in the present moment of existence, that 
he can do, without an act of selfish preference. He can 
only decide in the present moments of life what would 
be the superior course, having no attachment for one 
course in preference to another. 

72. It is selfish in man to feel any dependence on his 
trade or profession. Man can not feel any dependence 
on anything unless he anticipates results, for which he 
has a selfish preference or dread. To fear starvation, 
death in the alms-house, or any result whatever, is an 
act of selfishness ; for any future result is a dependent 
joy. Man should be faithful in his profession or trade 
as an act of love; but if he fears any result, he will be 
led selfishly to prefer some trade or profession. 

If a preacher feels dependent on his salary for a living, 
that dependence gives rise to a selfish attachment to the 
opinions or truths which that salary is paid to support. 
This feeling of dependence will be likely to prevent any 
new conceptions of truth being taught, and therefore pre¬ 
vent acts of love. 

If authors of books or periodicals feel dependent 
upon any remuneration for their labors, this dependence 
will give rise to a selfish attachment to the opinions of 
that class of people among whom they would be likely 


SELFISHNESS. 


59 


to suppose tlieir writings would be purchased and cher¬ 
ished. This will interfere with acts of love; for the 
writer that feels dependent on the remuneration he will 
receive, will not be likely at all times to follow his con¬ 
ceptions of truth and duty, where they would oppose the 
conceptions of those on whom he feels dependent. 

It is selfish in the editors and proprietors of newspa¬ 
pers to feel dependent on their subscribers; for their 
subscribers may or may not pay them. In this condi¬ 
tion all truths or opinions that would conflict with those 
of their subscribers could not be given to the public 
without a dread of results, which always produces unhap¬ 
piness, and which is selfish. 

If a farmer feels dependent on the result of his labor, 
it is selfish; for he has no means of knowing what will 
be the result. It should be only his aim to be faithful 
in the present moment of existence, with regard to him¬ 
self and those who are about him as objects of his care. 
When he fears results, his joys are dependent. 

If professors of colleges, of theological or law 
schools, or teachers of any class, feel any dependence on 
what they do or teach, for their position or salaries, they 
have a selfish preference that will prevent them from 
doing acts of love; for they must fear that an infringement 
on prescribed rules or opinions must deprive them of 
their position and pay. Any teacher who has an at¬ 
tachment to the position he occupies in preference to 
others, will be likely to teach opinions received on 
the authority of others, instead of his own conceptions; 
and also teach after prescribed methods, which will in¬ 
terfere with acts of love; for in not doing this, he must 


60 


SELFISHNESS. 


feel unhappy in fearing results with reference to his 
position. 

A merchant who feels dependent on his customers or 
fears the result of any investment, has a selfish attach¬ 
ment. This dependence is constantly inviting him to 
use deception, and to urge upon his customers articles 
with reference to profits, both of which interfere with 
acts of love. It is no more selfish in the merchant to 
use deception or to urge goods upon customers they do 
not need, than it is to feel a dependence on his profits to 
support him or to make him rich, which produce this 
effect. 

A man who feels any dependence on the suffrages of 
the people for any position or office, has a selfish at¬ 
tachment. One who feels this dependence is not likely 
to do or say any thing that will interfere with the opin¬ 
ions of those on whom he depends, which may con¬ 
stantly prevent him from following his conceptions, and 
therefore interfere with acts of love. 

A man who feels dependent on the labor of slaves 
for support, or for any position he may occupy, has a 
selfish attachment. Their death or leaving him will 
give him annoyance and grief. This dependence is con¬ 
stantly leading him to fear results, and call good every 
act which he believes will assist him to retain, and evil 
every act that would be likely to remove the means to 
his selfish attachments ; which acts will interfere with 
acts of love. There is no method of showing that the 
dependence exercised in consequence of a love of posi¬ 
tion in the slave owner, is more selfish than the depend¬ 
ence exercised any where else. Whoever exercises any 


SELFISHNESS. 


61 


dependence is selfishly attached to some condition, and 
also selfishly attached to the means by which he sup¬ 
poses that condition must be maintained. 

Man, in exercising a dependence on his God, has a 
selfish attachment to conditions ; for he supposes God 
has control over the changes of life, and can make him 
rich or poor, happy or miserable, send him to heaven 
or hell; while the anticipating or fearing any of these 
conditions, is an act of selfishness. It is as selfish in 
man to depend on God for all that he calls his own, 
as to depend on man for anything he calls his own. 
It is as selfish to depend on God for a comfortable situ¬ 
ation in the future life, as to depend on slave labor for a 
comfortable situation in this. It is as selfish to depend 
on God for eternal joys, as to depend on man for tran¬ 
sient joys. It is as selfish to depend on God for hea¬ 
venly mansions, as to depend on man for earthly 
mansions. It is as selfish to depend on God for the joys 
of heaven, as to depend on man for the joys of earth. 
It is as selfish to seek to walk the streets of the New 
Jerusalem in the future world, as to seek any other self¬ 
ish act that ever came to the consciousness of man. It 
is as selfish in man to seek the highest sphere in the 
future world, as to seek lofty positions in this. Every 
feeling of dependence is exercised through a selfish 
attachment to conditions ; and whenever exercised must 
interfere with acts of love. Freedom arises from love, 
but man is not dependent on love for freedom; because 
the acts of faith are imperative. Man must do in every 
moment of time what he has faith in as bringing joy. 
When man has faith in love, the acts of love are as im¬ 
perative as his existence ; for then he sees in them his 


62 


SELFISHNESS. 


joy, and it is impossible for him to go from joy to 
misery to his conception. 

73. It is selfish in man to feel dependent on any one in 
consequence of favors or presents received ; or to sup¬ 
pose others should feel any dependence on him in con¬ 
sequence of anything he has done. Those changes which 
come to the consciousness of man, as bearing upon his own 
life, should not be events of more importance to him than 
others; and they can not become so except through his 
selfish feelings. Man will never know the true causes 
of his giving or receiving, for they are results from an 
infinity of causes and effects. If he has made presents 
to any persons, and the acts become important, they are 
so through a supposed dependence or obligation resting 
upon the individuals receiving ; which will interfere with 
his doing acts of love; for to those who do not acknow¬ 
ledge this dependence after his conception of the man¬ 
ner it should be acknowledged, he would not be so 
likely to give. He has no means of knowing that the 
thankful do him more good than the unthankful; or that 
any event that seems to have a direct bearing on his life, 
does any more for him than any other that ever has or will 
take place ; and hence, any change taking place in which 
he has given or received, can not become more important 
to him except through a selfish preference. The reason 
why men are supposed to be under obligations in receiving 
an act of kindness, is in consequence of supposing that not 
to do acts of love are allowable. When man does acts of 
love continually, it is impossible for him to see one event 
greater than another, or to feel that any one should be 
under any obligations. When man feels that others are 
under obligations for any favors, it is through an attach- 


SELFISHNESS. 


63 


ment to a condition ; he expects that something he has 
done will bring to him some desired object in the future. 
This is an investment in which there is an uncertainty 
about the profits. If the dependence was always ac¬ 
knowledged with profits, there would probably be more 
favors bestowed. It is as selfish in man to give, and sup¬ 
pose that he is laying up treasure in heaven ; or to cast 
his bread upon the waters supposing it will return, as 
to make any other investment supposing it will bring to 
to him a remunerative consideration. If every one had 
faith that bestowing favors would be laying up treasure 
in heaven, making it a certain investment, there would 
be as many led to embark in the operation as to invest 
their money in merchandise, houses, and lands. Man 
can not seek any future joy except through a selfish at¬ 
tachment. The more important any future joy seems to 
him, the more selfishly will he seek it. If he has faith 
that treasure in heaven will last him for ever, it becomes 
more important to him to seek it than the treasures of 
short duration on the earth. It is as selfish in man to 
suppose that he can do something now, and place his 
God under infinite obligations to him in heaven, as to 
suppose his neighbor is under obligations to him if he 
saves him from starvation. Man can not anticipate any 
joy from any act he does, without being selfish ; and he 
should try to make every act of his life as of no more 
importance than as if he did not know it took place ; for 
there is an infinity of action taking place that does not 
come to his knowledge, that is as important to his life 
as that of which he is conscious. Man can only seek 
the joys of a selfish love as a future condition or effect. 
But the joys of love can not be carried to a future mo- 


64 


SELFISHNESS. 


ment in time, for it destroys all conditions and effects. 
To say that man can anticipate the joys of love for the 
future any more than he possesses that joy in the present 
moment, is to say that man can seek for something he 
has no faith in, which is impossible ; for the love a man 
has faith in, he always possesses in the present moment of 
his faith. Man can not anticipate the joys of love, be¬ 
cause the moment he has faith in them, he possesses them. 

Because man has spent much time in educating him¬ 
self, or supposes that he has superior ability to others, is 
no reason for supposing that any class of people should 
feel dependent on him. He has no means of proving 
that what he calls a superior method 1 or a deeper insight, 
will do any more good or evil than the oscillation of a 
leaf. It can not be shown that any one is under any 
obligation to another, on account of superior ability, ex¬ 
cept through selfishness ; for the man of superior ability 
cannot feel that he has a claim upon the people, except 
he supposes the people should be an instrument in giv¬ 
ing to him some object or position ; both of which it is 
an act of selfishness to seek. No superiority of talent or 
ability to accomplish any thing can be proved. To say 
a thing is well done or badly done, is merely to assert a 
finite conception of effects from an infinity of causes. 

Men who have spent their lives in service for their 
country, should not suppose that their country should 
feel any dependence on them, or should endeavor to re¬ 
member their past acts, or to give their names to poster¬ 
ity. No great man can prove that he has done any 
more for his country than any unknown being that ever 
has or will exist ; and he is in a condition of selfish- 
ess when he sees himself as more a cause to any effect 


S ELFISHNES S. 


65 


than any one else. When man supposes that he has 
done more to produce certain effects than others, he is 
likely to have for those effects a selfish attachment, 
and this attachment will interfere with acts of love ; for 
any action that would make those effects seem of less 
importance, and consequently render the service less like¬ 
ly to go to posterity, would afflict him with grief. Man, 
in supposing his country should cherish his name, has 
a selfish attachment to possible effects in the future, 
which is as selfish in him to cherish, as it is in others to 
believe that they should be the agents in rendering. 
No man can accuse his country or persons of ingrati¬ 
tude, except he believes himself deprived of some con¬ 
dition which should have been awarded him in conse¬ 
quence of services rendered ; for which condition it is an 
act of selfishness for him to seek in preference to the one 
he occupies in the present moment. Man has no means 
of proving that he should have anything he does not 
have, or that he can fill any position or office better than 
any one else. 

If a man feels any dependence on any one in conse¬ 
quence of presents or favors, it is through an attach¬ 
ment to some future result. This is the source of 
the selfish control of individuals over the masses. 
Tyrants are obeyed through a fear of results. The 
ambitious are obeyed through anticipated favors. Man 
is as likely to meet with results he would avoid in one 
action as in another; for he can never know future 
results, or make any calculations on them, unless he 
understands infinite action. 

74. It is selfish in man to do any thing in order to 
become famous. There is always an uncertainty whether 


G* 


66 


SELFISHNESS. 


man will be able to become famous; and in seeking it 
through good or evil, he will be led to do those acts which 
he supposes the people most in the habit of praising, or 
what he thinks will invite praise. Whoever feels any 
preferences about what the people shall say of him, has 
a selfish attachment to results that will interfere with 
acts of love. 

75. It is selfish in man to praise others. Man can 
never praise others from his love, because he can not 
praise unless he finds something superior ; and nothing 
can be superior, except through a selfish attachment. 
Man can not say that one is a greater poet, statesman, 
scholar, orator, or divine, than another, except he 
judges through some standard; and whatever standard 
he adopts is a selfish preference, because he has no means 
of showing that it is correct. Love can not find anything 
superior or inferior, because to acknowledge either, is to 
acknowledge a preferred condition. Any standards which 
men adopt, by which they may know who is great, are a 
constant temptation to all who have any desire of praise ; 
and men are, in consequence, led to prefer those acts 
which the people in their relative positions see to be 
great. Man is not likely to find freedom when he is 
seeking for something which he has no means of know¬ 
ing is a good or not; and in this way he is led from acts 
of love. The world may call it a great act, because one 
nation has obtained a victory over another ; but there is 
no means of proving that it is a greater act than the fall 
of an autumn leaf. 

Whoever praises great names in the past or present, is 
giving to the people authority; for to say that any man 
is greater in any particular, is to teach that the standard 


SELFISHNESS. 


67 


or acts by which that greatness is known, is superior, 
which can not be proved. Therefore, to praise the deeds 
of the famous, or to endeavor to give their names to pos¬ 
terity, is teaching the selfish preferences of one or of all 
who previously praised, as a more perfect standard to 
judge from than any other. If the world becomes free 
from selfishness, it cannot find any great men or women. 
Every standard of greatness adopted becomes authority, 
and teaches that the definite acts which have taken place 
in one moment of time should take place in the next mo¬ 
ment ; or what one finite being does and says, another 
finite being should do and say ; and if one man writes a 
poem, a story, a history, becomes a doctor of divinity, a 
judge, an orator, every one should seek to become some 
one or all of these things. Whatever great men have done 
to make them famous, is a prescribed course for all who 
would be noted in the same channel. This will always in¬ 
terfere with acts of love ; because this prescribed course 
can only be adopted through a selfish preference. Man 
does not know, because he comes into a relative condition 
by which the people see him as great, that he is so ; and he 
can not prove himself to be of any more importance than 
the birds. Those who praise great men and names acknow¬ 
ledge and teach the authority by which that greatness 
becomes known. It is as selfish in man to acknowledge 
any standard of greatness as to acknowledge authority in 
any instance. Any prescribed course by which men 
have become great or more known to the world, is a con¬ 
stant acknowledgement of authority. The name of one 
rfian may be more known to the world in consequence 
of conditions beyond his control; but to say that he is 
superior to any other person, or to recommend his works 


68 


SELFISHNESS. 


or course of life as superior, is an act of selfishness. 
Man must decide for himself what are acts of love ; and 
if he endeavors to follow the course prescribed by an¬ 
other, he receives them on authority; and as a conse¬ 
quence he has no means of knowing whether they are 
acts of love or not. Man has no means of knowing that 
what to him appears great and good acts in others, are 
acts of love ; and to adopt the same himself would be to 
suppose that what one finite being done in one moment 
was an act to be done in all moments. Man can not 
give praise, but what he acknowledges and teaches others 
to be led by authority. If God, Christ, Paul, or any 
one is called great, to say what they have done, is teach¬ 
ing from authority. 

76. It is selfish in man to write his own biography 
or the biography of any person ; or to write a story or 
the history of any country, sect, creed, or science. 
Man has no means of knowing that the events of his 
life are of great importance ; and for him to presume 
they are, in consequence of any person’s telling him 
that he is great or noble, is to acknowledge a dependence 
and selfish attachment to their opinions. Everything 
that a man does with reference to making his name more 
known, shows a selfish attachment to the opinions of 
those he would address, and also a selfish attachment to 
those conditions and events which may render his name 
famous. 

The life of any individual cannot be given to the 
world as an act of love; because to do so man is 
obliged to make a selfish preference, and is obliged to 
suppose that some man’s life is more important than that 
of another, and he is obliged to adopt a certain stand- 


SELFISHNESS. 


69 




ard in order to judge what is great. Man does not 
write the life of another, unless he supposes he can give 
some remarkable traits of character and unusual events 
which the world must see as great or ignoble. But it 
can not be shown that any one event is good or evil, 
great or ignoble, more than another. For men to select 
any persons to write their lives, is to endeavor to give to 
the world what is great and small through a selfish at¬ 
tachment to some standard; and hence, to teach others 
through this standard to seek greatness and to avoid ob¬ 
scurity. To all who believe that it is important that the 
lives of the great should be written, it is a temptation 
to them to seek to find biographers, and to seek to bring 
to their own persons those events and traits of charac¬ 
ter to which they are selfishly attached, and to which 
the world will give praise. It makes no difference how 
good or great the individual is supposed to be, the 
standard of goodness or greatness cannot be given to 
the world except as an act of selfishness; for any stand¬ 
ard thus adopted supposes one individual superior to 
another ; and also supposes that what an imperfect con¬ 
ception calls good and great in one moment, should be 
honored as such in all future periods. It is an act of 
selfishness to specify any great or noble act; for it is 
authority for others to do the same. Man must judge 
for himself what would be an act of love. 

When a story is written to teach a duty, after the 
author’s conception, it is the same as to acknowledge 
that the teaching of that duty is not an act of love; 
for in teaching duties through exalted characters, man is 
obliged to acknowledge a standard he often thinks him¬ 
self to be false; and this standard cannot meet the con- 


70 


SELFISHNESS. 


ception of any other individual, as teaching the same ex¬ 
alted character, except on authority ; and also while it 
presumes to teach duties, it presumes to foster the selfish 
attachment of readers to conditions as well as for story 
reading; and to lead others to judge of individuals in 
life, as the author has awarded merit and demerit to 
imaginary beings. It is as selfish in man to pass his judg¬ 
ment on an imaginary as on a living person ; for a living 
person, whom he judges, may be an imaginary being to all 
who read his writings. Has any one succeeded in making 
the world better by acknowledging their prejudices 
and selfish attachments ? Is love so poor and starved 
that it must ask for charity ? Has any one been made 
better by being taught first to be selfish, and then to be 
dutiful ? When a story is written, does the author do 
more than to tell what he likes and dislikes ? All stories 
are written with reference to the gratification of their read¬ 
ers ; and whoever writes them, must seek that standard 
which suits the greatest majority. Does this standard go 
beyond a constant detail and fostering of selfish attach¬ 
ments ? Does it not suppose that the admiration of the 
sexes, with reference to marriage, is of superior import¬ 
ance ? Does it not presume that wealth, title, and posi¬ 
tion is of importance ? When man would teach any 
duty to the world in the form of a story, presuming in 
that form it would obtain more readers, he admits that 
he is willing to foster a selfish preference for novel read¬ 
ing, if the world will consent to hearken to some moral¬ 
ity. This is an endeavor to teach duty under false and 
deceptive representations. Can any one be found who 
will not endeavor to teach duties at times? Was ever 
the selfish feelings of any class of people addressed 


SELFISHNESS. 


71 


except for mercenary interests ? When man decides to 
address a selfish interest, for the purpose of disseminating 
truth, that truth can be nothing more than a conception, 
for which he has the same selfish attachment as is felt 
for wealth, power, or position. 

In writing a history, man selects those events which 
appear to him of the greatest importance ; or those 
which have been considered in the past as such; or 
those which will attract the most attention among his 
readers. If a man courts public favor by means of his 
writings, he is seeking a selfish and dependent joy ; be¬ 
cause there is an uncertainty whether he succeeds ; and 
in order to succeed, he must seek not his own, but the 
standard of others. This will interfere with acts of love ; 
for any standard that can be acknowledged, is dependent. 
In order to write a history of the past, he must adopt a 
standard by which he discovers important events ; and 
this standard is always false ; for he has no means of 
showing that one event is of more consequence than 
another ; and they can not become so to any one ex¬ 
cept through a selfish preference. Is the quarrelling of 
princes about kingdoms of any more importance than 
the quarrelling of dogs about bones? Is a contention 
for victory in any national assembly of more impor¬ 
tance than a contention between two game cocks ? Is 
estimating every year the amount of tonnage on the 
seas of any more importance than a farmer’s count¬ 
ing his sheep ? Is the relating how commanders dis¬ 
posed of their men in battle of any more importance 
than the relating of a fight in a house of ill fame ? 
Is the relating of how commanders of navies disposed 
of their vessels in a fight of any more importance than 


72 


S ELFI SHNES S. 


the relating of how snakes meet and fight with each 
other ? No nation can assume that it has control over 
mighty interests, except through selfish attachments. 
What is called a nation’s interest is usually the selfish 
interest of a few individuals; and by those individuals 
the nation is controlled with reference to a standard 
which they have adopted through their conceptions, or 
by precedents. But what is called a national eve®, is 
an individual action ; and why a particular action is 
called national, is because a certain number of people are 
called on to notice the action of one of their number. 
No man can exalt another above himself, except as an 
act of selfishness ; and when an individual comes before 
a nation of people to act, to suppose that his position is 
superior to that of any being, or that his actions are of 
any more consequence, arises from selfishness. His¬ 
tories are always imperfect authorities and precedents 
for future guidance. Whoever writes them, must give 
a preference to a selfish and dependent standard. 

The history of any science, creed, or sect, cannot be 
given except through a selfish preference on the part 
of the author to some standard, which he cannot assume 
except through selfishness. 

77 . It is selfish to read any books or papers for per¬ 
sonal gratification or pleasure. Whoever seeks personal 
gratification in reading, is likely to meet with disap¬ 
pointments and annoyances. All personal gratifications 
will interfere with acts of love ; and if man is attached 
to the reading of novels, satirical or humorous composi¬ 
tions in papers, or to any kind of reading or study, he 
has an attachment that will prevent his acting from his 
love. 



SELFISHNESS. 


73 


78. It is selfish to give any event to the world as being 
more wonderful or marvellous than any other. Man 
has no means of showing that any event is more won¬ 
derful than another ; and no event can become so to him 
except through his selfish feelings. If man believes 
anything is wonderful, it becomes authority, and ad¬ 
dresses his selfishness. To teach that Christ was the 
Son of God, in consequence of the wonders he per¬ 
formed, is an act of selfishness ; for those wonders are 
used as evidence to produce a belief in this opinion. If 
man acknowledges that he believes in Christ in conse- 
qnence of his wonders, this acknowledgment arises in 
consequence of a selfish preference to particular events, 
which he cannot prove to be more wonderful than any 
event that ever took place. Whoever sees wonderful 
things must be led by authority, and cannot act from 
his love. If a man would say to the world that he has 
angels watching over him; or mention the names of 
the famous dead, as having preferred him to do any 
kinds of work ; or that a body of the rays of heavenly 
light are shining on him; or that he has received from 
departed beings crowns, wreaths, arrows, staffs, and 
shepherds’ rods, it is an act of selfishness ; for he has no 
means of knowing that any event of this kind is more 
important than any other; and he could not give it to 
the world except he feels the world should be depend¬ 
ent on him in consequence, which is to acknowledge a 
selfish love. 

79. It is selfish in man to anticipate any joy or fame 
from any prophecy that any being here or in the fu¬ 
ture world may make to him. Every anticipated joy 
is dependent, because it arises in consequence of some 


74 


SELFISHNESS. 


selfish attachment. Man has the love in every moment 
he has faith in; so that it is not possible for him to 
expect any future joy, except through a selfish prefer¬ 
ence to conditions. 

80. It is selfish in man to feel any shame or guilt 
in consequence of any thing he ever done. Man can 
not show that any event of the past was unnecessary ; 
if he can, he can show that all events were unnecessary. 
Whoever feels any shame must be led to use prefer¬ 
ences either for or against those individuals in whose 
presence he feels it, which will interfere with acting 
from his love. 

81. It is selfish in man to do less for any person on 
account of their reputation being called bad, or on 
account of any injury or insult he has received. He 
cannot show but any injury or insult was as necessary an 
action as any other. If the past acts of the reputed 
evil, or any injury received, would influence man to 
withhold his favor, it is selfishness, and will interfere 
with acts of love. Man must not cease to love on 
account of injuries; and to suppose that he should for¬ 
give is to suppose that he could acknowledge that he 
had received an injury; which he cannot do without 
being selfish. Any love or respect that can be inter¬ 
rupted in consequence of injuries, insults, or evil courses, 
arises from the selfish feelings. If man should en¬ 
deavor to give his neighbor a new love, or to give to 
him any information, and his neighbor should requite 
his intentions with scorn and hatred, and he would do 
any the less for him, it should tell him that his 
endeavor to teach his neighbor was the result of some 
selfish attachment. In using the word assassin, thief. 


SELFISHNESS. 


75 


harlot, if man implies that he is speaking of beings 
inferior to himself, or of beings that should be less 
loved or cared for, it is selfishness. Can man toil from 
his love and find a harlot, a thief, or a murderer ? Can 
he find the rich and poor ? Can he find the fanatic 
and the wise ? Can he find beggars and people of lofty 
positions? The free can only find brothers and sisters. 

82. It is selfish to seek for any titles that are con¬ 
ferred by countries, institutions, or organizations of men. 
The conferring of titles by the schools, and hence telling 
the world that some one is educated, — is a profound 
scholar, an orator, a deep reasoner, a learned 
divine, is an act of authority, the tendency of which is 
to impress upon others that what a certain class of 
people call learning should be considered so by all. 
The standard by which any school judges that an 
individual is learned, can not be selected except by an 
act of selfishness ; and to use this standard as authority 
will interfere with acts of love. Man can not adopt 
any standard and show it to be true. No one can study 
what others prescribe for him, except he perceives it to 
be an act of love, and for any school to prescribe what 
shall be a course of study for one or a class of men, is to 
presume that infinity is understood. Man has no 
means of knowing that there is any more learning in 
one thing than in another. A man that spends years in 
reading the manuscripts of the Fathers, or in tracing 
the derivation of words, does not know that his educa¬ 
tion is superior to one who has never learned to read. 
Man has no means of knowing that he does anything 
towards educating himself in any moment of time. 
No school can say what will be an act of love for 


76 


SELFISHNESS. 


another to learn; but schools say what should be 
learned in consequence of a standard which has been 
adopted. Man can only decide for himself what would 
be an act of love ; and the moment he does anything, 
because others have done the same, he acts from 
authority. It is selfish in man to select one branch of 
study in preference to another for his gratification; 
and he can only do so through some selfishness. It 
is as selfish to call any one class of information 
learning more than another, as it is to use partiality 
with reference to any thing. When one man thinks he 
has a superior education, is he hot likely to manifest his 
claims by telling the world who is educated ? by saying 
some are deep and others are loose reasoners ? that 
some manifest a design in writing and others do not ? 
that one has written a book in which he shows his 
extensive researches in ancient and modern lore, and 
another his ignorance of it? that one has disciplined 
his mind by the study of oriental languages and dialects, 
and another by means of chemical affinities ? that one 
writes in a chaste and finished style, and another in a 
ponderous and unwieldy manner ? Any standard that is 
adopted, is the- education of a critic. No one can 
criticise the writings of another, except he is selfishly 
attached to some standard which he has adopted on 
authority ; or except to tell the world he is himself 
learned, which he cannot prove. Can man prove there 
is more education in learning the construction of 
sentences in a dead language, than there is in learning 
how to trap bears ? Is there any more education in 
studying the problems of mathematics than there is in 
learning how to hold the plow ? Is any thing learning 



SELFISHN ESS. 


77 


any more because it is inaccessible to tbe masses of 
mankind? Is that man educated who has learned 
something that can only be known to the few, in 
consequence of the time and inclination of that few 
to acquire it ? 

Man is often led to suppose that, when a being is 
capable of speaking before an assembly in a connected 
manner, this must be the result of a superior educa¬ 
tion. But to another it may be an inferior education ; 
and seem surprising that man should learn to connect 
words together, quote from ancient and modern authors, 
draw comparisons of things in nature, when the desire of 
the speaker could be given in one sentence. When man 
expresses anything in a speech more than his desire, it 
is an act of selfishness, and he addresses the selfish 
feelings. A man may make a speech in favor of a cer¬ 
tain person becoming governor ; but all that he says, 
more than to express his wish to that effect, is an appeal 
to the selfish feelings, and shows his own selfish prefer¬ 
ences. The supposing that the capability to make a 
speech and conform to the rules and standards adopted by 
the schools, is a superior education, will interfere with acts 
of love ; because man is tempted for his own gratification 
and for the people’s, to make speeches, when as an act of 
love he would not seek for any such acquirements or op¬ 
portunities. It is selfish in man ever to make a speech 
because he is capable of making one; or in making a 
speech, to express any thing more than his desire as it 
seems to him as an act of love ; because he has no means 
of- knowing that one course of action will do any more 
good than another ; and to express anything more than 
his desire, is to show a selfish attachment to some result. 


7 * 


78 


SELFISHNESS. 


Man is constantly changing ; and what he calls a good 
education in one period, in another may appear to him 
false; and any preference that he may make for any 
standard adopted by the schools or the people, will blind 
and prevent his love. Man may adopt any standard as 
an act of love through which to give his ideas ; but 
when he supposes one standard to be superior to another, 
or a point to judge from, it is an object of selfish attach¬ 
ment. No one can seek for any titles of distinction con¬ 
ferred by the schools, without a selfish attachment to the 
standard by which they know people to be learned or 
ignorant. 

When any one seeks to be an ordained preacher or a 
doctor of divinity, he seeks the influence of authority ; 
and in seeking it he supposes himself dependent on a 
certain organization or a class of people. No organiza¬ 
tion or class of people can become known, except through 
some distinctive standard by which they class themselves. 
That standard may be in the belief in one or three Gods, 
or in the Bible; it becomes immediately an exalted stand¬ 
ard on which the mark of distinction sought is depending. 
No one can dedicate himself to any one kind of work, 
but it will interfere with acting from his love ; for any one 
kind of work he may prefer is a selfish love. The acts of 
belief are as imperative as anything else ; but when belief 
will confer distinction, the distinction is a selfish attach¬ 
ment and imposes authority. One who seeks ordination 
is not likely to interfere with those conditions on which 
the act is depending ; and the act of seeking implies that 
he will believe in a future period of time as he does in 
the present moment; which is selfish, and which he can 
not truly assume except he understands infinity. Man 


S ELF I SHNESS. 


79 


can not seek ordination, or to be a doctor of divinity, ex¬ 
cept he is selfishly attached to some belief or to some 
future result. 

No titles of distinction or rank can be sought from any 
country or organization of men, except through some 
selfish attachment to future results. 

83. It is selfish in man to suppose that he has a bet¬ 
ter claim to any country, land, or territory, on account 
of superior civilization. There is no method by which 
one nation can show that they have a superior civilization 
to that of another, except through a selfish preference to 
some standard. Man does not know that riding in the 
cars is a superior method of travelling to that of walking, 
except through a selfish attachment; neither can he prove 
that he accomplishes any more by one method of 
travelling than by the other. Man can not prove that a 
dwelling that is built after his best conceptions of mod¬ 
els, is superior to a log hut. It is superior to him only 
through a selfish preference. To show that one nation 
has a superior civilization to another, man must show 
that some acts will do more good than others, and that 
some conditions are preferable, which is impossible ; for 
all conditions and acts are effects from an infinity of 
causes, and are also causes to an infinity of effects; and 
man can not show that any one condition or act does 
more good or is superior to that of another. Man may 
be able to communicate with his friend at a distance in 
a few moments ; but he can not show that this method will 
do any more good than if he was not able to communi¬ 
cate with him in as many years. Man may act through 
any of those channels or methods that may come to his 
knowledge as an act of love ; but when he is attached to 


80 


SELFISHNESS. 


any one it is selfish, and will prevent his acting from 
his love. Circumstances may require that man shall 
live in the woods ; and if he has an attachment for houses 
he will be in grief. Man may also be called on to walk 
instead of to ride; and if he has any preferences he 
will be disappointed A superior civilization is only 
known through a standard to which man has become 
selfishly attached. Therefore, one nation can show no 
superiority of claim to any country or territory to other 
nations or tribes. 

84. It is selfish to suppose that one nation is superior 
to another; because any standard by which that superi¬ 
ority is supposed to be known, is false and dependent. 

85. It is selfish in man to suppose that he shall have 
in the future world a better locality, or will be in a su¬ 
perior condition to that of drunkards, assassins, or har¬ 
lots. Man can not show that he is entitled to any thing 
on account of any of the acts of life. He can not show 
that he has done more good or evil than the insect. 
He does what he believes will bring to him joy. Man 
may walk beside a drunkard and be free ; but he can 
not show that he has any claims on account of his free¬ 
dom, — neither can he show that his acts are superior to 
those of the drunkard’s in their results. Man can not 
prefer any locality or condition in preference to other 
persons, except through an act of selfishness. It is as 
selfish in man to prefer poverty to riches, as riches to 
poverty; it is as selfish in man to prefer heaven to hell, 
as hell to heaven; it is as selfish in man to prefer the 
society of the pure, as to prefer the society of the de¬ 
graded ; for he must go where the acts of love lead him. 
Man’s condition and locality must be as dependent as 


SELFISHNESS. 


81 




the condition and locality of the assassin or harlot; and 
he can show no superiority of claim over them ; and 
it is selfish in him to wish to be away from or with 
them; for he should be faithful, as an act of love, with 
reference to every thing that is about him in the present 
moments of his existence. 

86. It is selfish in man to anticipate any joy or pleas¬ 
ure in the future, more than what he has in the pres¬ 
ent moment. All joy that man anticipates possessing 
must arise from selfish attachments, because it is im¬ 
possible for him to anticipate the joy of love ; for all 
that he has faith in he possesses in every moment of 
time; therefore, any anticipated joy that he does not 
now possess, arises from selfish feelings. Man can not 
anticipate any thing that he has no faith in ; and when 
he has faith in any thing that is not dependent, it comes 
to him in the same moment of time that he has faith in 
it. If man has faith in loving his enemies, he loves 
them in the moment his faith comes. 

87. It is selfish in man to fear that any joy he now 
possesses shall be removed from him in the future ; be¬ 
cause any thing that he has fears of he must regard as 
uncertain and dependent. Therefore, to fear the loss of 
any pleasure is selfish ; for that pleasure is dependent 
on the changes of life. 

88. It is selfish in man to try to excite any feelings 
of solemnity, awe, or admiration, by his writings, or by 
public addresses. Man may excite these feelings with¬ 
out an intention to do so ; but if he does any thing with 
reference to exciting them, it is a dependent and selfish 
joy. Man can not seek to excite these feelings as an 
act of love ; but must have reference to his own praise, 


82 


SELFISHNESS. 


or some result to which he is selfishly attached. One 
who is accustomed to exciting the attention of people, is 
likely to be disappointed if he does not succeed in 
doing it ; therefore, all praise and admiration that is 
bestowed on him should be the same as unknown acts. 
An orator may be called upon to leave public speaking 
as an act of love; and if it would be any annoyance to 
him, it should tell him of his selfishness. If a man 
knows that he excites the admiration of the multitude, 
he is in a selfish condition until he seeks to avoid it; 
for, to know it, and not seek to avoid it, is to acknowl¬ 
edge a selfish dependence. Solemnity, admiration, or 
awe, are excited with reference to authority. It is as 
selfish in man to use these as a means to do good, as to 
use them as a means to do evil. The good that men 
seek is a finite conception ; and when any thing is taught 
to be sought from other motives than from love, the 
teacher shows his selfish attachment, and shows that he 
is willing to appeal to a selfish interest in securing it. 
Man, in selecting choice words and phrases, in trying to 
present his opinions in a new and novel manner, in 
dressing up old truths so that they will be acceptable, 
is laboring for a selfish attachment. He is not likely to 
give any one a new love by doing it; but may possibly 
produce the opinion that he is an acceptable speaker or 
writer. As an act of love, man should not say any 
thing, unless he has something to say; as an act of love, 
he can not presume that he is the one to speak in pre¬ 
ference to another. When man has been accepted as a 
popular speaker or orator, the standard through which 
that acceptance has been made, is authority, and a temp¬ 
tation to all public speakers to adopt, that they may be 


themselves accepted in like manner. It is a selfish con¬ 
sideration which seeks to detain an audience for an hour, 
when the same could be said in a few minutes. It is a 
selfish consideration that seeks to attract an audience by 
means of choice words and sentences, by peculiarities of 
voice and gesture. It is as selfish in a public speaker to 
seek to attract an audience through any oratorical pow¬ 
ers, as it is in hucksters to attract customers by means of 
a violin. It is as selfish in a public speaker to seek to 
attract an audience by means of witty or satirical sayings, 
as it is in a showman to attract an audience by circulat¬ 
ing pictures of flying horses. It is as selfish to seek to 
attract an audience by saying that the famous dead will 
speak through a living person, as by any story that shall 
appear to be marvellous. Man may write and speak, and 
conform to any standard with the direct intention of 
giving his ideas as an act of love; but he should not 
give that standard a selfish preference, or use it as 
authority for the promulgation of his selfish attachments. 

89. It is selfish in man to go to any place from curi¬ 
osity or from authority, or to seek to hear any public 
speaker on account of superiority of talent or address. 
Any seeking with reference to curiosity, pleasing ad¬ 
dress, the exciting of wonder or admiration, of pity and 
contempt, will interfere with acts of love. It is owing 
to man’s selfish condition that one thing appears curious 
and another common, one thing wonderful and another 
simple. To prove that one thing is wonderful, is to 
prove that every thing is so ; which is the same as say¬ 
ing that every thing is and is not wonderful. If man 
has any attachment for places to which he would go, he 
cannot act from his love; for he may wish to go to 


84 


SELFISHNESS. 


church, the theatre, a prayer meeting, a menagerie, or a 
political mass meeting ; when, as an act of love he should 
be picking up kindling wood or helping his neighbor to 
make hay. Whoever go to the church or theatre to 
have their admiration and wonder excited, are but 
tempting all preachers and theatrical actors to labor for 
this end. 

It is selfish in man to go to church, or a prayer meet¬ 
ing, because his fathers or others have done the same. 
It is selfish in man to suppose that a church organization 
is necessary, because God, Christ, or Paul supposed it 
was necessary ; for when a man receives any thing on 
authority, he can not act from his love. Man can not 
prove that he should go to church in preference to the 
theatre from authority; and the only way a man should 
determine whether he should go to a church, theatre, or 
a house of ill fame, is in acting from his love. Any 
thing that can interfere with an act of love is an act of 
selfishness. It is as selfish in man to prefer Christ to 
a harlot, as it would be to prefer one of his own children 
to another. It is selfishness in man to say that he will 
work for God in preference to the devil; because he 
has no means of knowing where an act of love will lead 
him. It is possible for him to meet a being covered 
with reptiles and worms, which he may call the devil; 
but if he can show that such a being should not have care 
and attention, he can show that no existence is entitled 
to it. 

Whoever is led by curiosity, — can have his attention 
excited by one thing more than another, has a selfish 
feeling to be overcome before he can know the joy of love. 

90. It is selfish in man to suppose that one form of 


SELFISHNE SS. 


85 


government is better, or can be better administered than 
another ; or that any one organization of men can do 
more good than another. It is impossible for any organ¬ 
ization of men to exist, except for the protection of in¬ 
terests which are important through selfish attachments ; 
for whoever seeks protection, presumes that he is not now 
protected. There is no method by which man can learn 
that he is protected in one moment of time more than 
another. When he supposes that he is not protected in 
one period of time, it is in consequence of some object 
to which he is selfishly attached being assailed or in 
danger ; and he can not tell but the means he may take 
to protect may be the means of destroying ; and he can 
not tell, if he did not seek to protect, but what it 
would remain to him ; and if taken away, he does not 
know but some other condition could take its place in 
consequence, with which he would be better pleased. 
A man’s house may be burned by an incendiary, and 
through a selfish attachment to property, he may think it 
best to organize a body of men to kill all persons who 
would be likely to burn houses ; but he has no means of 
knowing that houses would be any better protected ; nei¬ 
ther does he know but the burning of his house and a dif¬ 
ferent action on his part would bring to him all the 
objects of his desire. Man can have no faith in infinite 
action unless he supposes he is protected in every mo¬ 
ment of time, whether in or out of any organization or 
government. Every organization arises from a selfish fear 
or a prospective selfish interest. Men can not organize 
themselves to do acts of love, for they do not know 
where they will be led ; but they can organize them¬ 
selves with reference to an attachment to property, and 


86 


SELFISHNESS. 


with reference to an attachment to their opinions ; be¬ 
cause they wish to retain them, and teach others to do 
the same in future moments of time. Man, in owning 
property, should be faithful with regard to it; but if it 
makes any difference whether that property is taken 
from him, he is selfish. If he is faithful over property 
because he wishes to retain it in future moments of time, 
it is an act of selfishness. He should be faithful over it, 
independent of all considerations — be faithful over it, 
whether he will possess it during his life or will be 
deprived of it at any moment. In this way he is faith¬ 
ful over what is in his care as an act of love; he can be 
faithful over it, presuming that the result of his labor 
will be of benefit to himself or a brother ; but if he pre¬ 
fers himself to his brother, he is tempted to be unfaith¬ 
ful if he thinks his brother will soon possess what he has. 
Governments arise because men wish to retain in future 
moments of time what they possess in the present mo¬ 
ment, which is a selfish and dependent joy. Organiza¬ 
tions are teaching men to prefer themselves. The aim of 
all governments or organizations of men must be con¬ 
stantly defeated; because it is impossible to protect any 
selfish interest or attachment; for they are dependent, 
and must have their changes resulting from an infinity of 
causes and effects ever unknown to man. Man, in one 
condition, may feel that he is more secure with his selfish 
interests than in another; but this arises merely from a 
standard which he and his neighbors have adopted by 
which to judge ; for he has no means of knowing at what 
moment in time his selfish interests are in danger ; and 
he has no means of knowing that one government will 
protect his interests more than another; or that his 


SELFISHNESS. 


87 


interests will be better protected where there is or is no 
government. If man is attached to one form of govern¬ 
ment, or prefers to live where there is or is no govern¬ 
ment, it is a selfish preference that will prevent his 
acting from his love; for he may, as an act of love, be 
called on to live under all forms of government and 
where there is none. 

Man has no means of knowing that a combined body of 
persons do more good than a single individual. Man is 
often led to an organization because he does not like the 
most direct methods of doing good. It is selfishness in a 
body of men to agree to act together ; because in so 
doing some one or all of them must act from authority. 
Man may be led to suppose that in joining a society for 
benevolent purposes, that it is an apology for his not doing 
deeds of kindness. A society must always act through 
individuals, and one or two do the labor in a prescribed 
channel for all. It must be presumed that when a cer¬ 
tain result is obtained, it should meet the satisfaction of 
all. But no society can decide what result is the most 
preferable, except through some selfish attachment. A 
society supposes that not to act faithfully with reference 
to every thing is allowable ; because if all act from their 
love, they can do no more in than out of a society. Man, 
who wishes to do something for the poor occasionally, 
and to keep on in a course with reference to his selfish 
attachments, finds it convenient to deposit funds in the 
hands of others to be distributed ; but if he is acting 
from his love, he can not employ agents except to pro¬ 
duce in those agents love. Man, who spends his energies 
in a society, is not likely to suppose that he is so much 
called on to act elsewhere ; and he also acts through a 


88 


SELFISHNESS . 


channel pointed out in a previous moment of time, which 
will interfere with his acting from his love. Man may- 
join a society to help the poor, and in the next moment 
be called on as an act of love to spend his energies in 
assisting the rich. He cannot prefer the rich to the 
poor, or the poor to the rich, — the harlot to the bigot, or 
the bigot to the harlot, without being selfish. In join¬ 
ing an organization, man must see some thing to be done, 
which he supposes a society can do better than himself, 
which is selfish ; for he does not know what the result 
of his own action will be, or that of a number of indi¬ 
viduals ; and also an act of love must be performed in 
.that moment it is conceived, and he should not presume 
that its contemplated act will be a precedent in a future 
moment for the movement of another or of a society. 
Man may meet a drunkard and say that he will reform 
him, and that he will organize a body of men to reform 
others. If he means by this reform that he is seeking 
the definite result of having drunkards leave off drinking, 
he is seeking a selfish and dependent joy ; for there is 
much uncertainty whether that result can be obtained. 
But a drunkard will leave off drinking as soon as he 
knows that it prevents joy ; and when he has this faith 
continually, he is cured of his appetite. But this faith 
can never come to him except through love. Man 
does not know that the drunkard is doing any more evil 
than himself; and when he assumes he is doing more 
good than any one else, he is in a condition of selfish¬ 
ness. Every society supposes that they are in a superior 
condition to those whom they would benefit, which is 
selfish ; because they can not show that they are more 
an instrument in the infinity of causes and effects, than 


SELFISHNESS. 


89 


any thing else. An act of love has reference to love, 
and whether the result is obtained, man can not judge, 
but it always is joy, for it is not dependent; for whoever 
acts from love, must have faith that the result is always 
as it should be. A society may be organized to keep 
drunkards from drinking, or to have the people believe 
in Christ and the Bible, or to tell people they will all 
be saved, or to tell the people they will have a heavenly 
mansion; and if these results are obtained, it is not 
known that any love has been given. A man may leave 
off drinking, but unless he has faith in love, he is no 
better ; and he could not have left off, except his sel¬ 
fish feelings had been invited to new channels. Man 
may leave off drinking on account of the opinion of 
society, and to regain a position to which he is selfishly 
attached; but he is the same selfish man he was previ¬ 
ously. Society may say, because he has regained a lost 
position, that he is now in good standing ; while, in re¬ 
ality, the only difference is in a change in his selfish feel¬ 
ings. Society prefers one condition to another, through a 
selfish preference. In consequence of the adoption of a 
standard they see one condition as good, and another as 
evil. Man may suppose he has done good when he breaks 
up all lottery schemes, so that there is no place that people 
can obtain tickets; but the people who wish to buy 
tickets are no better in consequence of being denied the 
opportunity; their selfish feelings will continue to act 
in some channel, until they have faith in love. Church 
organizations may succeed in making the people believe 
in Christ as the Son of God; that Sunday is a sacred 
day; and that through fasting and prayer they may be 
eternally happy in the future world; and through an 


8* 


90 


SELFISHNES S. 


attachment to this standard the church may believe that 
the world is better; while it is impossible for any one 
to be better except from love. The same selfishness 
that will lead man to anticipate sensual pleasures, will 
lead him to anticipate the possession of a house not 
made with hands. A man that would toil with industry 
and economy to obtain funds to spend a few weeks in 
riotous living, has not an inferior selfishness to the man 
who would spend a life of fasting and prayer to obtain 
his anticipated joys in the future world. A man may 
give up sensual desires by receiving a present of a house 
or a wife, but his selfish love has taken another course ; 
and no one can call the last condition better than the 
first, except through a selfish attachment to a standard. 
Man may leave off pleasures to obtain peace with God, 
in hopes of eternal life ; no one can say that in this last 
condition his selfishness is less than previously, except 
through a selfish preference. A society may teach that 
all men will be saved from hell ; but the joy anticipated 
in consequence of this news, is the same as of any other 
pleasure of earth. It is an act of selfishness in man to 
fear that he is exposed to a future hell; and it is equally 
as selfish to teach that men are not exposed to it. 
Whether man is exposed to hell or not in the future 
world, is of no consequence, except through a selfish 
fear. Therefore, to teach that men are not exposed to it, 
is not to relieve them of their selfishness, but to turn their 
fear into a selfish anticipation of joy. Man is as selfish 
in anticipating heaven as in fearing hell; he can not 
anticipate one or fear the other, except as an act of sel¬ 
fishness ; because all the joy that man anticipates arises 
from his selfish attachments. He can not anticipate joy 


SELFISHNESS. 


91 


where he has no faith; and to anticipate joy, he must 
anticipate it from things that are dependent; because 
the love he has faith in, comes to him in the same 
moment of time with his faith. 

Men may organize themselves into a society, and sup¬ 
pose that they will set the world an example how to 
live ; but the fact of their organizing shows that they 
are seeking new channels for their selfish loves. Man 
can not be dissatisfied with any society he is now in, ex¬ 
cept through a selfish attachment to conditions. He sees 
some riding in carriages, with diamond rings, and others 
carrying bricks and mortar; but this would be of no 
consequence to him, except through a selfish preference ; 
he can not prove that one condition is superior to the 
other; or that a medium condition is the more preferable, 
except as an act of selfishness. All new organizations 
of communities are, with reference to harmonizing, selfish 
attachments. But a man’s selfish attachments will be as 
much in unison in one place as in another; and as long 
as he possesses them he will feel that his joys are depend¬ 
ent. It is selfish in man to suppose that any thing is 
wrong ; for when this supposition is entertained he can 
never find any thing that is right. Man has no method 
of proving that every thing does not take place as it should. 
When man would organize a new society, he implies that 
he is right and society is wrong ; or that those who go 
into the new society are right, and all who do not are 
wrong. But he can not suppose this, except through a 
selfish attachment to some condition. He may probably 
wish all to hold the same amount of property; but this 
is of no consequence only through his dislike to see some 
rich and others poor. If he* wishes to place people more 


92 


SELFISHNESS. 


in a condition of mutual dependence, he will increase 
their selfish feelings ; for they would then be nearly in the 
same condition as a man who would expect his neighbors 
to make him rich. Man may suppose that a new or¬ 
ganization of society will reform the degraded which the 
present form of society has failed to reach. Men who 
would organize themselves for this purpose, must exist 
in some moment of time previous to their organization; 
and when they feel that any one needs reformation, how 
can they decide that it is not the time for them to 
work with their own hands, without exercising any de¬ 
pendence on organizations ? Will man invite a drunk¬ 
ard to occupy a piece of land, when he is afraid to have 
him occupy a couch in his own house ? Will man pay 
for the transfering of negroes to a foreign country, when 
he would not hoe corn by one’s side ? Will man invite 
a harlot to become reformed in an institution, when he 
will not permit one to set at his own table ? Is man so 
afraid of the opinion of society that he has not courage 
to work until he has converted society to his own 
opinions ? Is man afraid to work, because he has in his 
mind individuals of lofty positions ? Will the strong 
in love and toil wait for organizations, God, heaven, hell, 
or the angels ? Will the strong in love and toil weep, 
although they wash the feet of bigots and traitors con¬ 
tinually ? W ill the strong in love and toil laugh if they 
are told they shall have a house not made with hands ? 
Will the strong in love and toil faint if those of lofty 
positions look at them when they are carrying cordials 
to dying harlots ? 

All organizations of society or governments are found¬ 
ed on the supposition that the interests of the people, as 


SELFISHNESS. 


a whole, are more important than the interest of a single 
individual, which there is no means of proving. This 
decision arises in consequence of a numerical calcula¬ 
tion, which is without any basis. Two dollars look 
more important than one; a thousand acres of land 
more important than one acre ; a million of individuals or 
worlds more important than one individual or world; 
but the only basis for this estimation is in selfishness. 
There is no method of proving that an eternity of inter¬ 
ests of a million of individuals is of any more impor¬ 
tance than the interests of a child in one moment of 
time. It is an act of selfishness to say that two indi¬ 
viduals shall be protected in preference to one ; or that 
a world of inhabitants shall be protected instead of a 
a single child. It is only through selfishness that 
man perceives a continent superior to an acre of land. 
He can not prove it so, except through the numerical 
calculation that a continent has more acres, and will 
feed more people. This is simply a decision that two 
dollars are more important than one; which from the 
infinity of effects resulting from every thing, there are no 
means of determining. Man cannot prove that in¬ 
creased quantities are more important than decreased 
quantities. He may say that one man should die to save 
a nation of people; but he can not render this decision 
without a selfish preference in favor of numerical quan¬ 
tities, for which he has no basis, except through his 
selfish feelings. He may say it would be reasonable to 
prefer the greater quantity; but this is no more than 
saying it is reasonable to be selfish. Numerical quan¬ 
tities exist to man in consequence of his relative condi¬ 
tion ; he may count a million of stars, — he is no 


94 


SELFISHNESS. 


nearer their number than if he did not know 
how to count. But man in counting any thing, is 
obliged to suppose that he determines quantities in part 
or whole, which is in consequence of his being finite. 
Man can count, because he knows time and space; but 
when he presumes that any thing he can portion out in 
his mind and call a quantity, and that two of those quanti¬ 
ties are more important than one, he is on an uncertain 
and dependent basis ; for his numerical calculation, as 
soon as he would try to trace the causes and effects, is lost; 
and when he has counted as far as his numerical table will 
allow, he knows no more than if he had not tried to 
count. Man may say that a horse is a very useful ani¬ 
mal, and that an insect is of no use ; but this is in con¬ 
sequence of judging from a selfish basis; — the horse 
will draw him in a carriage, and the insect often annoy 
him ; but he has no means of tracing the infinity of causes 
and effects to know which is the most important animal. 
The assertion that the interests of a body of people is of 
more importance than those of an individual, rests on a 
selfish preference. Therefore, man should not prefer any 
one government or organization of men to another, or sup¬ 
pose that the interests of any one class of people are 
superior to those of another. 

91. It is selfish in man to celebrate the anniversary of 
any past event, or to do anything with reference to making 
one event more important than another. Those events 
are called important in the past, which are supposed to 
give a preferred condition now enjoyed. But what man 
has now is not resulting from one action more than an¬ 
other in the past; and when anything that is now pre¬ 
ferred is attributed to one action, that action becomes 


SELFISHNESS. 


95 


authority and a precedent that will interfere with acts of 
love. It is selfish to suppose a government is of any 
importance in consequence of the amount of blood shed 
in its defence, or in consequence of venerated men hav¬ 
ing sanctioned it. The celebration of every anniversary 
is an act of fealty to a past event, which man has no means 
of knowing to be more important than any other; and 
which leads him to think that the condition it is supposed 
to have given is preferable to others. Every event with 
which man is acquainted in the past, should be to him 
as unknown events; and he should not call the actions 
of any being in the past superior to his own actions; if 
he does, they become authority, which interfere with 
acts of love. 

The precedents by which judiciary decisions are ren¬ 
dered, are authorities which are selfish and dependent. 
Man may find two persons fighting for a bone ; it is of 
no consequence which has it; and there is no means by 
which he can determine which should have it. He may 
decide that a priority of claim should take the preference ; 
but this is uncertain, for that person which obtained the 
bone first might have sought it with the stronger selfish 
feelings. And again, the ancestors of the other person 
might have had a preemption claim to all the bones in 
that vicinity. And thus may considerations continue to 
be brought up, no one of which man can prove to be supe¬ 
rior to the other. To decide which person should have a 
bone, man must be a judge over the infinity of causes and 
effects ; but he finds this impossible ; hence is adopt¬ 
ed the standard of precedents. But he finds there are 
more causes to an effect than can be managed; and he 
consequently decides that some causes shall have a con- 


96 


SELFISHNESS. 


sideration, and others not. The more is done to make 
any selfishness simple, the more complicated it becomes. 
When he thinks that the first in possession should take 
the preference, he decides in consequence of a belief that 
this is the easiest way to dispose of it. Man might sup¬ 
pose that in giving this decision, it would be a precedent 
for all future quarrels; but with every new quarrel 
there comes new considerations, by which new prece¬ 
dents must be established. The complication of prece¬ 
dents by which all judiciary decisions are rendered, com¬ 
mence in a selfish preference. That a previous decision 
or any enactment of legislatures should be resorted to, 
shows a condition of selfishness. Two men in the pres¬ 
ent moment of time will never be in the same condition 
of any other two men that ever existed ; and when they 
determine to decide which shall possess what both covet 
by precedents or enactments of legislatures, they decide 
to play a game of chance with each other, which, when 
decided, neither they nor no other being can prove to be 
justice. The necessity of resorting to precedents or to 
the enactments of bodies of men, should tell every one that 
a true decision was an impossibility. This is the reason 
why all judiciary proceedings are complicated; they have 
no basis, except in selfish preferences. Individuals 
may give decisions to the best of their ability; but they 
can never know what justice is, except through previous 
decisions and enactments. But man can not resort to 
previous enactments or decisions in order to act from his 
love, for they will constantly interfere and prevent his 
love. 

92. It is selfish in man to be attached to any one 
class of sounds in preference to others; for any attach- 


SELFISHNESS. 


97 


ment of this kind will interfere with acts of love, and 
bring disappointments. Every sound that comes to the 
ear of man, is music as much as another ; and he can not 
show that there is harmony in one sound more than 
in another. He cannot prove that any combination of 
sounds produce harmony more than others, except 
through a preferred standard. Man has a knowledge 
of music, because he hears a sound he dislikes ; hence 
arise chords in music in consequence of discords. 
Man can show no reason for disliking any thing, excepting 
through a selfish preference. He may suppose that 
nature teaches harmonious sounds ; but to prove that 
one sound is not natural, is to prove that all sounds are 
not. The first sound that man hears to dislike is in 
consequence of some selfish preference ; and from this 
preference arises what is called music. The cry of dis¬ 
tress and of lamentation, coming from animals or human 
beings, is disagreeable to man; but the reason why it is 
so is in consequence of his ever associating with those 
sounds, pain and misery. This is a false standard from 
which to judge what is harmony and what is not ; for the 
education of another class of beings may be to hear har¬ 
mony in those sounds, and disagreeable sensations in those 
that are now called music. Therefore, any standard by 
which sounds are called chords and discords can not be 
proved to be superior to any other, except through a 
selfish preference. The cries of distress and of joy 
both arise in human beings from their selfish feelings. 
Man can not exult over any thing, except through a 
selfish attachment; and the cry of distress arises in conse¬ 
quence of his supposing he is not protected. Man will 
never be free as long as he prefers one sound to another; 


9 


98 


SELFISHNESS. 


for the preferred sounds present attractions that will 
prevent his acting from his love, and make his joys 
dependent. Man can not prove that any one class of 
sounds more naturally give pleasure to him, except 
through a selfish attachment. 

93. It is selfish in man to prefer one method of 
death; or to prefer the time of his death; or to prefer 
one kind of funeral service or burial to another ; or to 
prefer in what manner he shall be buried. Man can 
not pi'ove he dies in a natural manner, if he dies by old 
age any more than if he dies by violence. If man can 
prove an unnatural action, he can prove that everything 
is unnatural. No reason can be found why a man 
should die in old age in preference to infancy. Those 
who have strong selfish attachments may suppose when 
a man is incapable of doing anything for himself or 
others, it is the time for him to die. This is the only 
method that one moment in time can be called superior 
to another for death. The old and feeble are not called 
beautiful. It is not supposed necessary to give to the 
old and feeble instruction. Young men and women 
go to town, while the old and feeble stay at home. 
The old and feeble are expected to die; they cannot 
work and toil ; it costs money to keep them; and what 
funds they have earned are needed for a new genera¬ 
tion ; is not this the ground on which it is decided that 
there is a natural time of death ? Will man spend a 
season at a watering-place, when he has a crippled father 
on the shores of an unseen world ? If the old man 
dies, is his death natural ? If the young man, travel¬ 
ling for pleasure, meets his death by accident, is it sad 
and unnatural ? If man has any preferences when he 


SELFISHNESS. 


99 


or his friends shall die, it will interfere with his acting 
from his love, and he is likely to meet with disappoint¬ 
ment and grief; and there is no grounds but those of 
selfish interest, by which man can show that he should 
die in one period of time more than another. Certain 
diseases and old age may make it probable that a per¬ 
son shall soon die ; but if one period of time is grieved 
over as a calamity more than another for death, it is 
from selfish preferences, and those who have them 
can not always be faithful. 

Man may be obliged to starve to death in the woods 
or be buried in the sea, and if he has any preferences 
how he should die, and how buried, and what his fune¬ 
ral shall be, he is likely to meet with disappointment; 
besides, these preferences will cause him to hesitate in 
doing acts of love whenever he supposes them uncer¬ 
tain. 

94. It is selfish in man to prefer any class of individ¬ 
uals to others on whom to bestow acts of kindness. If 
man would prefer drunkards to hypocrites, harlots to 
prize fighters, slaves to slave owners, the meek to the 
proud, the ragged to the fashionable, the rich to the poor, 
laymen to preachers, to whom to do acts of kindness, he 
cannot act from his love. Any preference he may 
make for one class of people is a selfish attachment. 
He should only seek to be faithful as an act of love, 
where he may be called. Man can not prove that one 
individual is more deserving than another; and from 
his love he must go to one as soon as another. Man 
may decide that he can do more by working for drunk¬ 
ards all his life-time ; but he should have no pre- 


100 


SELFISHNESS. 


ference for them to others, for he may be called on to 
labor for enemies and traitors. 

95. It is selfish in man to seek for any one condition 
in life in preference to another. Man can not say that he 
•will be rich or poor ; or that he will not be rich or 
poor; or that he will not be in any condition known 
among men, without being selfish. If man is rich, 
poor, blind, or a beggar, he should seek to be faithful, 
as an act of love with reference to himself, persons, and 
things in his care ; not presuming to know that what he 
is in one moment he shall be in the next. If man says 
he will be rich, it is an act of selfishness; but in being 
rich, it should be of no consequence to him whether he 
is a beggar or not in the next moment. If man says 
he will live among his friends, it is an act of selfishness; 
for he may be* called on to nurse his dying enemies. 
If man says he will toil for his enemies, it is selfish¬ 
ness ; for he may be called on to toil for those who self¬ 
ishly love him. If man says he will toil for beggars, it 
is selfish ; for he may be obliged to work for those 
of lofty positions. It is selfish in man to say that he 
will be famous, or that he will not be famous ; for he 
may, or he may not be famous. If a man says he 
will give a virtuous name to posterity, it is selfish ; 
for, from his acts of love, he may be called a traitor 
and a villain. If a man says he will die a Christian, it 
is selfish ; for, from his acts of love, his name may go to 
posterity as a blasphemer. If a man says he would 
sustain a good reputation among men, it is selfish; for, 
from his acts of love, he may be known as an associate 
among harlots and tnieves. If a man would say that 


SELFISHNESS. 


101 


he would behave himself after the best rules of deco¬ 
rum, it is selfish ; for, from his acts of love, he may 
behave in a manner called indecorous. If a man says 
he would be a teacher of young ladies, it is selfish ; for 
he may be called on to act as nurse in an insane hos¬ 
pital. If a man says he would be a professor in col¬ 
lege, it is selfish ; for he may be obliged to hoe corn 
with negroes. If a man would say that he would be a 
doctor of divinity, it is selfish; for he may be called on 
to teach children in alms houses. If a man says he 
would be a judge, it is selfish ; for he may be called on 
to act as a news boy. If a man says he would be a pro¬ 
fessor in a theological seminary, it is selfish ; for he 
may be called on to be a butcher. If a man would be 
free, he should have no selfish attachments; but seek to 
be faithful over every thing in his care, in the present 
moments of existence, as an act of love. 

96. It is selfish in man to prefer any one moment in 
time to another, on account of agreeable or disagreeable 
sensations. Man by seeking sensations of pleasure from 
music, indulgence, or any of the appetites or senses, ren¬ 
ders himself the more accessible to grief and pain. Pain 
and pleasure exist to man through selfish preferences ; 
therefore, the selfish condition by which agreeable sen¬ 
sations are sought, must be known through the opposite 
condition through which disagreeable sensations are 
avoided. Whoever finds the one, must be as often ac¬ 
quainted with the other. It may be said that man is ac¬ 
quainted with pain because he violates an organic or physi¬ 
cal law ; but this is impossible, for no being is, or ever can 
be acquainted with any law. To say that man can violate 
any law of nature, is to say that man can do an unnatural 


9 * 


102 


SELFISHNESS. 


act, or be in an unnatural condition. But if man can be 
in an unnatural condition in one moment of time, he 
must always remain so; because that condition that 
is called unnatural, is called an irregular recurrence in 
nature. If every thing took place in an irregular man¬ 
ner, man would not be an educated being; hence, 
the opposite is true, — that if every thing took place in a 
regular manner, man would not be an educated being ; 
therefore, man is dependent as much on irregular as on 
regular recurrences in life ; and when he says the regu¬ 
lar recurrences are the laws of nature, he only makes an 
assertion respecting his selfish preferences. A man who 
has all his limbs cut off is in as natural a condition as if 
he had the use of them. A man starving to death 
is in as natural a condition as one who has plenty of 
food. A man that is insane is in as natural a condition 
as one that is sane. If man violates an organic law 
when he cuts off his left hand, he violates an organic 
law when he partakes of food. The motion of his right 
arm is as natural when he cuts off his left hand, as when 
he carries food to his mouth. It is an act of selfishness to 
say one conforms to a law of nature, and the other vio¬ 
lates it, causing man to suppose if he did cut off his 
left hand, it was an unnecessary act; and causing him 
also to suppose that he can discover the laws of nature 
and obey them, while with an eternity of study he 
will never know any more about them than now. Man 
may look at a cut in his left arm, and see that he is bleeding 
to death ; there is no method by which he can prove that 
he is in an unnatural condition, except through his selfish 
feelings; he can not prefer dying with old age instead 
of bleeding to death, except as an act of selfishness ; he 


SELFISHNESS. 


103 

can not prefer life to death or death to life, in any 
moment, except as an act of selfishness; and if he had 
never sought any sensation of pleasure, he would not 
realize from his bleeding arm any sensations of pain. 
Man may say, when one takes poison that he violates 
the laws of his being; but the only grounds for this 
assertion is, that soon after taking the poison the body 
ceases to act as it did previously; and man looks upon 
this cessation of action as a great calamity; hence, all 
the violations of organic or physical laws that take place, 
are those actions which men dislike. All laws that are 
called laws of being and laws of nature, have no other ori¬ 
gin except in the selfish feelings. When man says his 
bleeding arm is in consequence of the violating of some 
law of nature, he the same as makes the assertion that in 
previous moments of time he has preferred some pleasure. 
It is selfish in man to say that he will not realize sensa¬ 
tions of pleasure, or sensations of pain ; or that he will 
realize either one or the other ; for by so doing, he has 
a selfish attachment, that will interfere with acts of love. 

Man may say that music, food, indulgence, and 
scenery, have always produced agreeable sensations, 
and the opposite of these have given pain and distress. 
But man was taught to dislike sounds, and hence arose 
to him music ; man has been taught to fear death, and 
hence has arisen to him disagreeable sensations with 
regard to every thing that is supposed to lead to death; 
indulgences give pleasure according to the amount of 
sensations they are capable of producing, because they 
are connected with the desire of life ; man learns that 
some places are beautiful by learning that some things 
are hateful. The standard by which these things are 


104 


SELFISHNESS. 


known is no certain basis for knowledge; for it has its 
origin in the selfish feelings. Man can he taught to 
have an attachment for death as for life ; and were 
men’s selfish attachments to take this change, what is 
now often called the laws of nature would be called 
violating the laws of nature. Man may say that it is 
natural to desire to live ; but it is no more natural than 
the desire to die, except through a selfish preference. 
What man knows as pain connected with death, if he 
had always been taught a selfish attachment for it, 
would be to him sensations of pleasure ; and all indul¬ 
gences of appetite would be to hiin^ sensations of pain. 
When, therefore, it is said that man violates an organic 
law, an assertion is made of him with reference to his 
present condition and selfish attachments ; while a 
change of his condition w r ould make the obeying of the 
previous law the disobeying of a new organic law. But 
to be free, man must not prefer life to death, or death to 
life ; pain to pleasure, or pleasure to pain; for in life 
and death, and in pain and pleasure, he should be faith¬ 
ful as an act of love. When man finds that he is in a 
condition called life, his faith should tell him that he is in 
an appointed condition ; and as an act of love, he should 
take food to support life, — doing it in order to be faithful 
in the condition in which he finds himself; but if he 
partakes of food, thinking it of importance whether his 
condition shall change in the next moment to that of 
death, it is an act of selfishness. Man, to be faithful, as 
an act of love, can not seek to prolong life because it is 
agreeable to him, or because he prefers life to death, or. 
because he would think it important whether he should 
have life or death in the next moment; but because 


SELFISHNESS. 


105 


finding himself in life, he would seek to be faithful in 
that appointment. Men, in prolonging life, should have 
no selfish attachment for life ; but they have this selfish 
attachment when they are taught to fear death. 

All agreeable and disagreeable sensations arise to man 
in consequence of the determinations of his selfish 
attachments. Man, to be free, should seek to overcome 
the sensations of pleasure that arise from appetite, 
music, and indulgence; and in overcoming them, he 
makes himself inaccessable to what is called pain, for 
one is dependent on the other. To do this, he must not 
selfishly prefer one moment in time to another for agree¬ 
able or disagreeable sensations. Man should not seek 
to prolong or to repeat an agreeable sensation, any more 
than he should seek to prolong or repeat a disagreeable 
one; and it is as selfish to do one as to do the other. 
The pleasures of appetite and of indulgence are selfish 
attachments as long as they are felt to be pleasures; but 
they are not overcome by relinquishing real needs or 
conditions in which man finds himself, for man must 
partake of food as an act of love; but what he calls the 
agreeable sensation of partaking of food should be over¬ 
come, for he can not partake of food as an act of love 
as long as he connects with it agreeable sensations. As 
long as he does this it is a selfish attachment, and will 
interfere with acts of love. It is, therefore, selfish to fear 
pain, to seek for, or to prolong pleasure. 

Man knows agreeable and disagreeable sensations . 
from relative conditions. What is pain to one, is not 
so to another. What is called an agreeable sensation, 
would cease to be such if it should constantly continue, 
or no other condition was known; and it would be the 


106 


SELFISHNESS. 


same with pain. But man’s condition is constantly chang¬ 
ing, and so are his sensations of pain and pleasure, in every 
moment; and, consequently, all laws which appear as 
such to his conception, only exist as laws in one moment 
of time, because they are known through conceptions that 
are constantly changing with respect to them. 

97. It is selfish in man to allow himself to be influ¬ 
enced to act from any other motive than that of love. 
Man commences to be selfish as soon as he is taught 
there is something superior and inferior to himself. As 
soon as he learns that God is the supreme ruler; that 
there are angels, prophets, and men superior to himself; 
that there are heavenly joys and mansions in the future 
world superior to what there are in this ; that riches are 
better than poverty ; that life is better than death ; that 
one kind of education is better than another; that fame 
is better than obscurity ; that a good reputation is better 
than the name of a traitor ; that a church member is bet¬ 
ter than a harlot; that a master is superior to the slave ; 
he learns to become selfish ; because he forms preferences 
to conditions and men, whom he has no means of prov¬ 
ing superior or inferior, except through his selfish feel¬ 
ings. As soon as man learns there is a God, he calls 
by the name of progression his selfish preferences, 
and supposes he is going towards that God. If a man 
walks, it is not progression to ride on the cars. Selfish¬ 
ness will never cease as long as man sees things superior 
or inferior ; for they are the things to be loved and hated, 
liked and disliked, necessary and unnecessary, laughed 
and wept over, — the heralds of pleasure and disappoint¬ 
ment. As soon as man is taught that there are condi¬ 
tions or beings superior or inferior, he is taught to buy 


SELFISHNESS. 


107 


and sell; he is taught that if he is prudent and econo¬ 
mical he shall be rich ; if he gives his energies all in one 
direction he shall be famous ; if he conforms to the best 
rules of etiquette he shall be fashionable ; if he prays to 
God for forgiveness he shall have a house not made with 
hands ; if he acknowledges Christ as the Son of God he 
shall be saved ; if he will quit drinking liquor he shall 
regain his lost position ; if he organizes a new society he 
will not be troubled with the rich and poor; if he gives 
money to send God to the heathens he will lay up trea¬ 
sure in heaven ; if he talks to the dead he will have a 
higher life ; if he conforms to nature he will die of old 
age ; all of which conditions can be bought and sold, 
and are objects of selfish attachments. When man learns 
that there is any thing superior or inferior to himself, 
he must form selfish attachments. Man can never be 
free as long as he sees one condition in life superior 
to another; as long as he sees some acts to be necessary 
and others unnecessary ; as long as he sees one man 
do what he should in one moment and what he should 
not in another ; as long as he sees weakness and debility 
resulting from disobeying the laws of nature. 

Are the young taught to learn because they will be 
respected? because there are elevated positions in society 
to which they should attain ? because they can become a 
doctor of divinity, a doctor of laws, a judge, or a senator ? 

A man who buys a lottery ticket does the same thing, 
and is at work in the same selfish channel. There is no # 
difference in a man’s working for the pay in one instance 
than in another. Who has scales to weigh the different 
selfish motives of men* and say which is the worst ? Is it 


108 


SELFISHN ESS. 


more selfish in the youth to toil that he may be senator, 
than when senator to give a vote to please his constitu¬ 
ents ? or to vote with the intention of securing a higher 
office ? or to vote because he is paid for so doing ? One 
man is not more a traitor than another, that acts from 
motives of selfishness. Is that man more a traitor that 
sells the blood of his friend, than the one who leaves a 
poor society to preach to one that is rich, opulent, and 
fashionable ? Is one any more bought than the 
other ? Can God tell which is the most selfish ? Can 
angels, prophets, or seraphs tell the difference ? Can 
those who shout the praises of God tell the difference ? 
Can those who expect to go to the New Jerusalem, to 
heaven, and to houses not made with hands, tell the dif¬ 
ference ? Does man know of a pair of scales that can 
tell him the difference ? Do the ancient dead know the 
difference ? Will they know the difference at the 
judgment day ? Is the man who sells the blood of his 
friend more a traitor than he who drives a houseless 
harlot from his door through fear of his reputation ? Is 
that man more a traitor who sells the blood of his friend 
than he who gives money to support preaching on account 
of the opinion of society ? Is that man, more a traitor 
who sells the blood of his* friend than he who builds 
palaces that his name may go to posterity ? Is that man 
who sells the blood of his friend more a traitor than he 
who makes any of his conceptions of duty subservient to 
his selfish attachments ? It is not the office of man to 
say who are traitors, but to see in every one a bro¬ 
ther ; to see none as superior or inferior to himself. He 
has no means of determining that one act of selfishness 




SELFISHNESS. 109 

is superior to another ; or that an act of love is superior 
to an act of selfishness ; or that an act of selfishness is 
superior to an act of love. 

Man does not know that any standard that he may 
adopt is superior to that of another. He may say that his 
standard shall be to guard his reputation and honor, and it 
is as likely to interfere with his acting from his love as 
the standard to obtain money at all hazards. Both mo¬ 
tives to action have their foundation in his selfish pref¬ 
erences. It is selfish in man to say he will be 
respected in society, or that he will not be respected ; 
and he may be as selfish in one condition as the other. 
Man who seeks to guard his reputation, may be led to 
contribute to build churches, when he feels that his con¬ 
tributions should go to relatives, or to the poor. He may 
work for that title called public spirit, when he should 
be helping his wife to wash clothes. He may be spending 
a week to write articles for the public, that it may be 
known he is learned, when he should help beguile the 
solitary hours of old men and women. He may toil with 
industry and economy to obtain suitable clothes to appear 
in a fashionable manner before young ladies, when he 
should be helping harlots to obtain fresh air. He may 
watch the markets to take advantage of their changes, 
that he may obtain money to reach that position which 
society respects, when he should be nursing a sick 
child, wife, or brother. Man may act from that 
standard called public spirit, good reputation, noble 
deeds, great speaking, finished orator, extensive literary 
acquirements, great linguist, splendid composer, learned 
scholar, scientific professor, — he cannot show that his 
selfishness is superior to that of any being that ever 


10 


110 


SELFISHNESS. 


lived. When man does not act from his love, he acts 
from selfish considerations, and is ready to be bought and 
sold. The poor are neglected because riches are better 
than poverty ; the man with old garments is neglected, 
because it is a good thing to be fashionable; the man 
who carries bricks is neglected, because to be a senator 
is a high position ; prisoners are neglected, because it is 
a good thing to be rich through deception, instead of 
taking things without giving equivalents ; it is foolish 
in every man to say what the Bible means, because there 
are some men who devote their lives in trying to 
understand it; it is foolish in man to decide what per¬ 
son should have a bone, because there is a supreme judge 
of the Commonwealth ; it is foolish in man to say that 
God is not superior to himself, because there are doctors 
of divinity ; it is foolish in man to say how government 
should be controlled, because there are great lawyers and 
statesmen; it is foolish in man to presume to instruct 
the public, because but few have been through college ; 
it is foolish in man to write a book, because but few can 
reach the standard of artistic design ; it is foolish in 
man to make inquiries whether the dead can talk 
with the living, because there are scientific men. Man 
can not ask another his opinion, and presume previously 
that the opinion will be superior to his own, except as 
an act of selfishness. It is selfish in man to do any 
thing because another calls it duty, except he can see it 
to be an act of love. The effects which men deplore as 
evil are of no consequence, except through preferences. 
No being existing, can prove that he is nearer the truth 
than another; and all that men call truth are usually 
relative opinions that are changing to their own concep- 


SELFISHNESS. 


Ill 


tions in every moment of time. When man supposes 
that another has or can have more truth than himself, 
he forms a selfish attachment. When he supposes that 
his Bible, minister, or God can tell him what is his duty 
better than himself, he forms a selfish attachment. Man 
may perceive to be an act of love what another points 
out for him to do; but unless he perceives it as such, it 
is an act of selfishness, and he does it because something 
is to be lost or gained. It would be selfish in man to 
tell the most degraded being what would be an act of 
love, presuming if the act was not done it would be 
a wrong ; because it must be an act of selfishness, unless 
it is perceived to be an act of love. 

Love teaches the acts of love ; for he who is free from 
selfishness will love every one ; he will love those who 
scorn, and those who extend to him a friendly hand ; he 
will love those who call him good, and those who call 
him evil; he will love those who cheat him, and those 
who make him presents; he will love those who come 
about his dying pillow, and those who pierce him with 
daggers ; he will love the pure and the defiled, — the 
ignoble and the great; he will love in heaven and hell, — 
in the highest and lowest sphere, — in the city and in the 
country, — in the churches and in the play-houses ; he 
will love every where and in every condition; for love will 
be his joy ; for love will not conflict with his conscience; 
for love will not make him dependent on any th ng ; 
for love will bring him liberty. There is no change in 
love; it is always the same. When man says that he 
has changed his love, he has reference to a selfish attach¬ 
ment. When man says he does not love, he has refer¬ 
ence to his selfish feelings. Love gives joy. Man can 


112 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


not say that love can increase or diminish, — that it can 
progress or retrogade ; because the love that can do this 
is selfishness. Love is not selfishness. Man may obtain 
new loves, — meaning the relinquishing of some selfish 
attachment, or the new objects that come about him for 
his care and attention ; — but there is no increase of love 
and joy in consequence of a change of condition. If man 
loves one being he loves the world. 


ARTICLE XII. 

THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 

An act of love can not be proved to be superior to 
an act of selfishness, because there is no means of deter¬ 
mining but an act of selfishness does as much good as 
an act of love, or that one is any more necessary than 
the other. When man is free from selfish attachments, 
then all his acts are acts of love, and his joy is not 
dependent. But man can not do an act of love in any 
direction, when there are selfish influences in that direc¬ 
tion to control him. An act of love, like an act of 
selfishness, has reference to an effect. An act of self¬ 
ishness is attached to effects, while an act of love is 
not. When man does an act of selfishness, he is disap¬ 
pointed if some particular effect does not take place ; 
but in doing an act of love he is obliged to have faith, 
that the effect will be as it should. It is impossible for 
man to act at all, unless he considers some effect as desi¬ 
rable ; but his joy is not in the effect, but in his loving. 






THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


113 


An act of selfishness expects joy in the effect. An act 
of love expects no increase of joy from the effect. If 
man gives money to a beggar to avoid him, it is an act 
of selfishness. If he gives money to promote any 
benevolent enterprise on account of public opinion, it is 
an act of selfishness. If he gives money to a poor man, 
judging him to be worthy, and if he afterwards finds 
him to be unworthy, and he is sorry for the gift, the 
act of giving is an act of selfishness; because in being 
sorry for the gift, he shows an attachment to a selfish 
and dependent standard through which he judged. An 
act of love does not presume an increase of joy to the 
person who does it; because he has no attachment to 
the effect that he considers desirable, and which prompts 
the act. Man may suppose his friend to be needy, and 
give to him ; but if the act of giving gives him joy, it 
is selfish; for he then shows an attachment to the effect. 
But a man who gives to his friend as an act of love, 
supposing him to be in want, does not realize from the 
act of giving any more joy than he previously possessed. 
There is no increase to the joy of his loving in the 
present moment; and if he finds that his friend is not 
needy, his joy is the same as before ; because his love is 
the same. If man practices self-denial to give to the 
poor, it is selfish ; because the act of self-denial shows 
that his desire to give to the poor is a selfish attachment. 
He is foregoing one selfish attachment to embrace an¬ 
other, that is his joy. It is impossible for a man to say 
what is an act of love in his brother man, for it is impos¬ 
sible for him to judge. A man may be called a philan¬ 
thropist, and be so through his selfish attachments ; and 
it is possible that there may be no difference between his 


10* 


114 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


selfishness and the selfishness of one who spends his life 
in drink. He may do for others, and have a selfish at¬ 
tachment for the effects which his acts are constantly 
producing ; and his love for these effects is as selfish as 
is the love of man for the effects of drink. Man has no 
means of proving that one effect is superior to another ; 
therefore, no one act is superior to another. An act of 
love is not superior to an act of selfishness, and no one can 
prove that an act of love does more good than an act of 
selfishness. One man may give to the poor a penny, as an 
act of selfishness; another man may give to the poor a 
penny, as an act of love; one penny is likely to do as 
much good as the other. The difference consists in the 
condition of the two individuals giving. One gives 
because he has a selfish attachment for some effect; 
while the other gives without any selfish preference 
respecting the result. Man may be as selfish in giving 
to others as he may be in endeavoring to become rich ; for 
it is as selfish to give to others through a love of 
effects, as to seek wealth through a love of effects. 

The joy that arises from love is not dependent; con¬ 
sequently, the acts of love are not dependent, because 
the result from an act of love, must be presumed by the 
one acting, as the result necessary. Two men may give 
to a child a penny, — one giving as an act of love, and 
the other through a selfish attachment to an effect; the 
act of selfishness is dependent, and the act of love is 
not, although the two men may have given to the child 
to have it cease its importunity. But if the child does 
not- cease its importunity, the man who gave the penny 
through an attachment to that result, is disappointed ; 
while the one who gave the penny for the same result. 






THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 115 

as an act of love, is not disappointed, but is obliged to 
suppose that the result of his giving is as it should be ; 
for if he does not suppose this, he must also have a self¬ 
ish attachment for results. An act of love, as far as the 
anticipated effect that causes the act is concerned, is as 
dependent as an act of selfishness. An act of selfish¬ 
ness is dependent, because man has a selfish attachment 
for the effect that he anticipates from the act. An act 
of love is not dependent, because man does not expect 
any new joy from effects. 

It can be demonstrated that an act of love must pro¬ 
ceed from one who is free from selfish attachments; but 
any standard by which acts of love can be judged, is self¬ 
ish and dependent. Man may suppose that giving money 
to the poor is an act of love ; but man may as often give 
money to the poor from selfish motives as he may do 
any thing else. Man may spend his time in caring for 
the poor when he should spend his time in caring for a 
sick father, mother, or child. Man in doing acts of 
kindness, may determine to do those which the world 
praises, and to neglect those acts to which the world 
gives no attention. The poor signifies to some, those 
beings whom organizations endeavor to assist. Those 
who give with reference to praise, find it convenient to 
give through organized bodies, who have the power to 
give their names to the world. The same act of selfish¬ 
ness that causes man to give in one instance, deters him 
from giving in another. A man who wishes for praise 
in giving, is likely to give when he has a suitable sum 
to spare that will invite praise ; but as the world does 
not usually think so much of diminished quantities as of 
increased quantities, he is not likely to give at all unless 


116 THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 

he has a suitable sum. A man who has a fortune at his 
disposal, may be led to take pains to make an investment 
for the poor, so that his name may go to posterity; but 
the same man, with a moderate competence, might 
not do anything for the poor, because no one would 
praise him if he did. If the people are invited to give 
on account of the pride of name, they are as often deter¬ 
red from giving, because a majority may not be able to 
give what is called a respectable sum. Man can not 
decide any act of another to be an act of love, because 
he has no means of knowing whether the person has a 
selfish attachment to effects. It is possible for two beings 
to do the same acts for the same effects, and one to act 
from his love and the other from his selfish feelings ; 
one having a selfish attachment for effects and the other 
not. One man may take care of a sick brother as an act 
of love, and another as an act of selfishness; and one 
may be as faithful in watching as the other. One may 
make sacrifices in order to do it, and the other not; one 
may do it anticipating a present and the other not; one 
may do it to avoid other irksome duties, and the other 
not; one may do it to gain the good opinion of the 
world, — and the other anticipating no new joy from any 
effects, but faithful constantly as an act of love. But if 
one cares for the sick through an attachment to some 
effect, he is not likely to be so faithful when he knows 
that the effect can not be. If he wishes the world to say 
that he nurses the sick in a careful and kind manner, and 
the world says the opposite, he is not so likely to be faith¬ 
ful ; because the motives to faithfulness are removed. 
Therefore, any standard by which acts of love are judged, 
is selfish and dependent. 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 117 

There is no more credit to an act of love, than to an 
act of selfishness ; and if man attaches any credit to an 
act of love, to him it is an act of selfishness ; because he 
can attach no credit to any action, except he supposes a 
selfish attachment allowable. When credit is attached 
to an act, it is supposed that man makes sacrifices to do 
it; while to make sacrifices to do anything, is an act of 
selfishness. Man does an act of love, because it is his 
joy, — the same as he does an act of selfishness ; and con¬ 
sequently, there is no more credit in one than in the 
other. 

The free can not do an act of selfishness, that good 
may come, because they have no means of knowing that 
one effect is superior to another. The effects from an 
act of love can not be proved to be superior or inferior 
to the effects from an act of selfishness. An act of love, 
or an act of selfishness, should not be confounded with 
what is called right and wrong. Man may call one 
action right, and another wrong ; but the standard by 
which he does this is selfish, because he calls that 
action right, the effects of which he likes, and that 
action wrong, the effects of which he dislikes ; but he 
has no means of proving that one is more right or wrong 
than the other. Man may kill his brother, but there is no 
means of proving the act wrong or unnecessary, although 
it can be demonstrated to be an act of selfishness. A 
man who kills birds for amusement, is selfish ; and the 
selfishness that causes man to kill birds, can not be 
proved to be inferior to the selfishness that causes man 
to kill his brother, although society may call one a 
harmless amusement, and the other the most flagrant 
crime. The difference between the two acts arises from 



118 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


selfish attachments. Man, because he has a selfish 
attachment for life, determines that death is one of the 
greatest of evils ; yet death is taking place in all moments 
of time — and to the consciousness of man, from causes 
known and unknown. But if a man dies from causes 
unknown or unavoidable, no one is supposed to be to 
blame. But there is no difference in the causes being 
known or unknown, in causing a man’s death. Because 
the causes are known they are no more avoidable than 
because they are unknown. Every act is determined by 
the strongest motive influencing the actor. Man, whether 
acting in conscious or unconscious moments, acts from 
the strongest motive. The action of the wind and the 
trees is determined in the same manner, — certain condi¬ 
tions coming about them cause certain determinations of 
action. The wind may blow a tree on to a man and kill 
him, and no one is supposed to be to blame. There is 
no more of a wrong in man’s killing his brother, than in 
a tree killing him. The only difference is, that one is a 
conscious and the other an unconscious movement, — the 
man acts from his strongest motive through his conscious¬ 
ness, and the tree through its unconsciousness. When 
man is killed by a tree or by his brother, neither action 
can be proved to be wrong ; because to prove it to be 
wrong will prove every action wrong, which is the same 
as saying that every action is right. As an effect, the 
death of man can not be proved to be of more impor¬ 
tance than the death of birds ; because man does not 
understand the infinity of causes and effects. Therefore, 
man has no means of proving that the killing of birds 
for amusement is any more a wrong than the killing of 
his brother, except through selfish preferences. One 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


119 


act of selfishness can not be proved to be superior or 
inferior to another. But the man that bills birds for 
amusement will not kill bis brother man for amusement, 
on account of education. Society deplores the last act, 
and pays no attention to the other. It is as easy to 
educate a mother to throw her child into the river, as to 
educate man to kill birds for amusement. Man who is 
educated to believe that to kill another is a great wrong, 
in order to commit the murder is obliged to overcome 
the horror he has to the effects from the act. He, with 
society, calls the act unnecessary and a wrong. But the 
man who kills his brother in battle, finds that the load¬ 
ing and firing of his piece, which kills, is the same 
thing as loading and firing to kill birds. Man, in raising 
a knife to strike down his brother, will not feel any 
different than when raising a knife to strike down his 
neighbor’s dog, except from the anticipated effects from 
the action. That action is the most important to him 
w T hich society makes the most commotion about, or which 
he has been educated to believe is the greatest wrong. 
But if he kills a dog for personal gratification, it is as 
much an act of selfishness as to kill a man. From 
ancient writings one may be led to suppose that Christ 
believed that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was a 
grievous wrong — so much so, that whoever was guilty of 
it must suffer eternally. Christians teach there is salva¬ 
tion from misery through Christ. But whoever commits 
an act of selfishness, can not prove that he has done a 
lesser wrong than he who blasphemes against the Holy 
Ghost. But society is different now than what it was in 
the time of Christ, and regards the killing of a man a 
more flagrant outrage than blasphemy. The reason of 


no 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


this change of opinion is, that now murder conflicts 
more with the selfish feelings through its effects, than 
blasphemy against God. A Christian avIio believes 
Christ’s words, will not be likely to commit an act of 
blasphemy, because he is supposed to prefer heaven to 
hell; but the free must commit an act of blasphemy, 
should it be to their conception an act of love. 

Man may suppose that for woman to be a harlot is 
wrong, and for him to seek the pleasures of indulgence 
in marriage is right. But the only difference arises from 
his selfish attachments. He has no means of proving 
that one act of indulgence with him, for pleasure, is any 
more selfish than to spend his life among harlots. Sex¬ 
ual indulgence for personal pleasure, is always an act of 
selfishness; and it is as selfish as any act it is possible 
for man to commit. The reason why indulgence among 
the married is right, and among the unmarried is wrong, 
is through effects which man likes and dislikes. Man 
is likely to have a selfish attachment for those children 
of which he supposes himself to be the father. But the 
money that must be appropriated to the support of his 
wife and children, calls upon his selfish feelings in another 
direction. Many of his children may be unbidden guests, 
because they interfere with his selfish attachment 
for accumulation. Since he feels compelled to support 
his wife and children, the possibility of his supporting 
any children of whom he is not the father, is grievous. 
But it is no more selfish for woman to seek indulgence 
for pleasure from one source than another; neither any 
more selfish for man to seek it in a house of ill fame than 
in his marriage bed. The only difference that arises, is 
from selfish attachments. But society, in calling one right 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 121 

0 . 

and the other wrong, presents a temptation to all the seek¬ 
ers of indulgence to be married. The unmarried who in¬ 
dulge, do so because they have less fears of the effects, 
which society deplore. It is selfish in man to covet his 
neighbor’s wife ; and it is also selfish in him to covet his 
own wife, or any being for his gratification or pleasure. 

A man that goes to any place for his own amusement, 
can not prove that he commits an inferior act of selfishness 
to that of Judas Iscariot in betraying Christ. Most 
Christians believe that the death of Christ was necessary, 
in the manner and at the time it took place; and also 
believe that Judas Iscariot was the means to the effect. 
But if the effects from the acts of traitors were not usu¬ 
ally deplored, is it not likely but Judas Iscariot would 
be considered as good an instrument in the hands of the 
Christian’s God, as any other being ? But J udas must 
have done an act of selfishness in betraying Christ; and 
it can not be proved to be superior or inferior to any 
other selfish act. But it may be supposed that to the Chris¬ 
tians, the betrayal by Judas was right in the sense that 
it enabled Christ to make a sacrifice on the cross, — that 
the world might reach heaven and avoid hell; and that 
it was wrong in that sense in which it established a pre¬ 
cedent by which others might betray those in their trusts. 
When one of a number of thieves turn States’ evidence, 
he stands in the same relation as Judas did to the author¬ 
ities at Jerusalem. Christ eluded the authorities until 
Judas, through a reward, enabled him to be detected. 
It is through a hope of reward which society offers, that 
one thief betrays his companions into their hands. This 
action is called right through selfish attachments. Any 
means is supposed to be allowable by which those * can 




122 THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 

be punished who make depredations on property. But 
a man who betrays the armies of his country into the 
hands of the enemy, commits no greater act of selfishness 
than the thief who betrays his companions, which act 
society calls right. A man who goes to any place for 
personal gratification, can not be proved to be any more a 
traitor than any other being ; because one act of selfish¬ 
ness can not be proved to be superior or inferior to 
another. A man who calls another a traitor, commits as 
selfish an act as the person so called committed, by which 
he obtained the name. Man who calls a woman a har¬ 
lot, commits as selfish an act as the harlot ever com¬ 
mitted. The man who goes to see another hung, commits 
as selfish an act as the criminal ever committed. 

It is called right in a man to give his testimony to 
convict criminals, that they may be punished. But if it 
is right in man to seek the punishment of one individual, 
it is right for him to seek the punishment of all individ¬ 
uals. He can find no means of proving that he should 
punish one man or thing in preference to another, for 
anything that ever took place. And when he seeks the 
conviction of any individual, he has no means of show¬ 
ing that his selfishness is inferior to that of any being 
known as a traitor. Hence, all actions that are called 
right and wrong, are determined by the selfish attach¬ 
ments ; therefore, man should not suppose that an act 
that is called right is an act of love. 

The words guilty and innocent are used with refer¬ 
ence to man’s selfish attachments ; for, from the infinity 
of causes and effects, one man can not be shown to be more 
guilty or innocent of any action than another. Man has 
no means of proving but every being that now lives is 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


123 


as much a cause of Jesus Christ’s death on the cross, as 
was the act of betrayal by Judas Iscariot. It is consid¬ 
ered right to punish one man with death, another with 
imprisonment for life, another for a lesser term, for the 
different degrees of wrong. But any standard by which 
one wrong is called greater than another, is selfish ; 
because, if man should be punished for one act, he 
should be punished for all acts ; if he should be impris¬ 
oned for one, he should be imprisoned for all. If one 
man should be punished by death for one thing he does, 
all men should be put to death for what they do. There 
is no means of proving that one man should suffer for 
any one act he has done, more than for another. If a 
traitor should be killed because he has been a traitor, 
every man should be killed ; and there is no means of 
proving to the contrary, except through selfish attach¬ 
ments. Society may kill a murderer; but society has no 
means of knowing but the act for which they kill the 
murderer will produce incalculable benefits. If the act 
of murder did not take place as it did, nothing that ever 
did or can take place can do so as it should. If one 
action in infinity can take place right, all action in infin¬ 
ity can take place right; if one action in infinity can 
take place wrong, all action in infinity must take place 
wrong. Hence, if man can prove that one being should 
be punished by death, he can prove ^that all beings 
should be punished by death; for every action in the 
universe is taking place from the strongest motive in 
every moment of time. If one man is to blame for 
killing his brother, every being and thing that exists is 
to blame for the same thing. There is as much reason 
in whipping the wind, lightning, and seas, as in whipping 


124 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


man ; for one can be proved to be as responsible as the 
other. Certain conditions coming about the wind, deter¬ 
mine its course ; certain conditions coming about man, 
determine his course — one is an act of consciousness, the 
other of unconsciousness. Man does not determine 
himself, what is the strongest motive to action any more 
than the wind ; for that strongest motive lies in the unhid¬ 
den past and future, as much as in the present moment of 
his deciding. His decision is as completely based on the 
condition of things about him, as they appear to his con¬ 
ception, as is the action of the wind based on condi¬ 
tions that decide its course. Certain conditions cause 
one man to act in a certain manner; certain previous 
and posterior conditions cause the conditions that influ¬ 
ence the conceptions of man, and so on, if any one has 
the power, these things can be traced through the infin¬ 
ity of causes and effects. Another man will act differ¬ 
ent from the same conditions ; and so it is with the trees, 
and every animate and inanimate thing that exists ; a 
different action will be the result from every one in the 
same condition and in dissimilar conditions. Hence, man 
can demonstrate what is an act of love and what is an act 
of selfishness; but he can not demonstrate that one is 
any more right or wrong than Sie other, — that one is 
any more necessary than the other, — or that the results 
of one are any better than that of the other ; but he can 
demonstrate that the acts of love must come from a man 
who has found liberty, —has found joy, that can not be 
interrupted by any action or condition in the universe. 

Acts of love and selfishness should not be confounded 
with honorable and dishonorable acts ; for what is called 
honorable and dishonorable is determined by selfish 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 125 

attachments. Man calls that thing honorable which he 
likes, and dishonorable, which he dislikes. He may- 
say that riches obtained in an honorable manner are good, 
and in a dishonorable manner, an evil; but one action 
may be as selfish as the other. To seek riches in any 
manner is selfish, because it is selfish to prefer condi¬ 
tions ; hence, it is as selfish to seek riches in an honora¬ 
ble as in a dishonorable manner. When selfishness is 
allowable, there are no degrees that can make one act 
any better than another. Man may dislike one act of 
selfishness, and like another. Man calls honorable those 
means by which good bargains are obtained ; while he 
calls dishonest those means by which property is ob¬ 
tained by theft; but it is as selfish to seek a good bar¬ 
gain in an honorable manner, as to seek property by 
theft. But the taking of property by theft, interferes 
more with man’s selfish attachments. It is supposed 
honorable for one man to take what he succeeds in 
making another consent to part with. But there is no 
difference in taking articles with consent than in taking 
them without consent, when taken for personal aggran¬ 
disement. But the last is called dishonorable, because 
it conflicts with the selfish attachment that all have for 
property. In this condition, those who are sharp in 
bargains have no more certainty of accumulating than 
others; hence, to take property by theft is dishonora¬ 
ble, — to take it by consent for personal gratification, 
honorable ; while one is as selfish as the other. 

Acts of love and selfishness should not be confounded 
with good and evil acts. Man may call it a*good act that 
saves the life of a friend, and an evil act that destroys 
the life of a friend ; but the reason of this distinction is. 


ii* 


126 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


that life is supposed to be better than death. An act is 
called good or evil from its results, while man has no 
means of proving that one result is more preferable 
than another. An act that destroys life may be an act 
of love, made with reference to some other effect. But 
the effect gives grief to all that have a selfish attach¬ 
ment for life ; while to the free, it does not bring grief 
or disappointment. The act that is called good may be 
a selfish act, and save life. It is called a good act be¬ 
cause it coincides with the selfish attachment for life. 
In reality, nothing can be taken from or given to the 
free. An act of love may result in the death of a 
friend ; but the life or death of a friend can not be pre¬ 
ferred, except through selfishness. A man that is free, 
might be hung for having unintentionally caused the 
death of a friend; it would be to him no punishment or 
privation. He can not prefer living in his own house to 
living in prison, for personal gratification ; he can not 
grieve over the effects of any act, for he cannot prove 
but effects are as they should be; he can not prefer when 
he shall die ; he can not prefer the manner of his death ; 
and he can not prefer what the world shall think of him, 
without being selfish. 

It is not always in the calling of any thing a good, that 
there is reference to a selfish attachment. Man may 
call that effect good which he supposes to be desirable, 
and not have an attachment for it. Any thing that man 
calls evil, may also not have reference to a selfish 
attachment; for he may call that effect evil which he 
seeks to avoicl, and have no selfish dread of it. But to 
mean by good any thing that should take place, and 
by evil, any thing that should not, has reference to 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


121 


man’s selfish feelings; for he can not prove that one 
thing should take place more than another. It may 
be said that Christ’s advent into this world was for 
good ; but it is so said in consequence of some effect 
which is supposed to have resulted from that advent. 
But there is *no means of proving that it resulted in 
more good than the advent of Judas Iscariot, or any 
other event. When it is saidlhat Christ did more good 
than Judas Iscariot, the assertion is based on selfish 
preferences; for man can not show that Christ did more 
good than Judas Iscariot. Man may say a thing should 
take place, in order to be free, — in order to build a 
house, — in order to possess joy; but when he^says a 
thing should take place which can not, he has reference 
to a selfish attachment. Hence, to the consciousness of 
man every action is good, or every action is evil; for 
both assertions are equal to each other. But by good 
and evil are usually meant unchangeable qualities in 
infinite action. But to know whether there are any such 
qualities or not, man must understand infinity. Good 
and evil arises to man through his selfish feelings; 
although what man calls good and evil may not have 
reference to selfish attachments. 

It might be supposed that for man to spend his time 
in teaching truth, would be an act of love; but no 
finite being can demonstrate any opinion to be truth. 
Man may adopt any standard, and then demonstrate 
from that point, as is done in mathematics. Man can 
show that two parallel lines will never meet, and call it 
a truth ; but what he calls a truth is based upon the 
conception that there can be such a thing as two 
parallel lines, which he has no means of proving; he 


128 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


can only say that they are so to his conception. Man 
may adopt a standard by which to know good and evil, 
and from that standard he may demonstrate what is good 
and evil; but he can not demonstrate his standard to be 
true, or nearer the truth than any other standard adopt¬ 
ed by man. Man may adopt the standard, that Christ 
died to save man from hell, and demonstrate from it 
what would be good and evil ; but he has no means of 
demonstrating that his standard is any better than any 
other, except through selfish preferences. Man may 
adopt a complete system of philosophy, and in it have 
no inconsistencies ; he can not prove that the philosophy 
is true, although all the demonstrations may be true 
from the standard adopted. 

Man may attach certain definitions to the words love 
and selfishness, and from the standard "thus adopted, 
demonstrate what would be acts of love and selfishness; 
he may demonstrate that man is capable of possessing 
uninterrupted joy from one, and misery from the other; 
but he can not demonstrate that the standard through 
which these things are proved, is any better than any other; 
and to teach that it is superior is an act of selfishness. A 
system of philosophy is not truth, because no inconsist¬ 
encies can be found, or because every one believes it, 
or because it demonstrates a condition of uninterrupted 
joy. A standard must be adopted in order to demon¬ 
strate these things. The standard of love cannot be 
taught to the world as superior to any other standard, 
except through the selfish feelings. Man may demon¬ 
strate that one standard can be productive of more joy 
than another; but this does not prove it to be truth, 
because man can not demonstrate that a life of uninter- 


THE STANDARD OF LOVE. 


129 


rupted joy is any more necessary, or will result in any 
more good than a life of uninterrupted misery. Man 
can not demonstrate that selfishness is better than love ; 
but he can demonstrate that selfishness will produce 
misery, and love happiness. And so may man continue 
to demonstrate from any standard he may adopt; but 
he has no means of proving that one standard is supe¬ 
rior to another. Hence, one man has as much truth 
as another, because each one adopts his standard of 
truth, and one can not be proved to be superior, 
although one standard may be proved to be productive of 
misery, and another of joy. Man endeavors to confer 
on those he loves the greatest amount of joy, irrespec¬ 
tive of selfish conditions or circumstances ; but if he has 
any preferences, he is likely to produce pain, because he 
would urge upon some to eat an orange when they 
would eat an apple. Acts of love have reference to 
the joy of all, but man can not do acts of love if he 
has selfish attachments; consequently, if each person 
has a selfish attachment for his truth, he can not teach 
it as an act of love. But if man has no selfish attach¬ 
ment for any standard of truth, when he thinks best 
he can teach his truth as an act of love. An act of 
love has reference to joy as an effect, but does not pre¬ 
sume that one effect is superior to another. Whatever 
man believes to be superior he must have an attachment 
for ; and he can do nothing, with reference to it as an act 
of love, because in acting he has a selfish attachment 
for an effect, and consequently must know disappoint¬ 
ment if the effect does not take place. Man that has 
a selfish attachment for his standard of truth, can not 
teach it, except as an act of selfishness. Hence, one 


130 


ILLUSTRATION S. 


man’s truth can not be superior to another, and no truth 
can be taught as an act of love, except man is free 
from selfish attachments. Hence, the standard of love 
may be taught as an act of love, and also as an act of 
selfishness; for whoever teaches it, and can be disap¬ 
pointed at the effect of his teaching, is selfish ; but who¬ 
ever can teach it and have no selfish attachment to 
effects, can teach it as an act of love. Does man aspire 
for joy ? as an act of love let him be told how he can 
find it. If man does not aspire for joy, it would be an 
act of selfishness to tell him how joy could be found. 


ARTICLE XIII. 

ILLUSTRATIONS . 

I. 

Man should believe what he does in every moment 
of time. If he should not, he can never believe what 
he should; for he has only his conceptions in the pres¬ 
ent moments of existence, to tell him what to believe. 

II. 

Man should do what he does in every moment of 
time. If he should not, he can never do what he 
should; for he has only his conceptions of what is joy 
in the present moments of existence to tell him what 
to do. 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 


131 


III. 

To be free, man must see joy in every moment of 
time. If he can not, he can never be free ; for if free¬ 
dom is dependent, or can be interrupted, it is not 
freedom. 


IY. 

It is imperative on man to do what he thinks will 
bring to him joy in every conscious moftient of time. 
If it was not imperative, he could not be a conscious 
being ; for in seeking his joy, he acquires all the infor¬ 
mation and experience that he possesses. 

Y. 

.Man must act. from the strongest motive inevery con¬ 
scious moment; for if it were possible for him not to 
do so, he must act without any previous or posterior 
cause for acting, which is an impossibility. 

VI. 

Freedom is not dependent on conditions. If it is, 
there is no freedom ; for every condition of which man 
has a conception, is changing in every moment of time. 

VII. 

To declare the existence of God, is to declare God a 
finite being ; for God is conceived of by man through 
effects that come to his consciousness; and to say that 
God is the cause, is to say that God acts from motives, 
and motives imply a previous and posterior action, and 
consequently imply that God is not acquainted with the 
infinity of causes and effects. 


132 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


VIII. 

Man has no conception of any being superior or in¬ 
ferior to himself. If he has, he must be acquainted 
with the infinity of causes and effects, which is impos¬ 
sible. 

IX. 

Man does not know that any one action that has ever 
taken place, has done more evil or good than another. 
If he does, he must be acquainted with the infinity of 
causes and effects, which is impossible. 

X. 

All conditions in which man can be placed, are de¬ 
pendent. If they are not, changes would cease to take 
place to his consciousness ; and if changes should cease 
to take place with him, he would be unconscious. 

XI. 

Man must know changes in.all periods of time. If 
he does not, he must be capable of making the past and 
future in all periods, his present conscious moment. 

XII. 

The action of man is imperative in every conscious 
moment of time ; because he aspires for joy in every 
conscious moment, and because he dofcs in the times 
and localities of his existence, while conscious, what he 
believes will bring to him joy, or is his joy. 

XIII. 

Faith in love constitutes freedom ; for the joy of love 
is not dependent on any thing. If it is, there is no 
freedom. 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


133 


XIV. 

Freedom is not dependent, although it arises from 
love; because when man has faith in love, the neces¬ 
sity of loving is imperative, for then it is his joy. If it 
were not his joy, he would not be free. Therefore, 
freedom is not dependent on anything. 

XV. 

Every anticipated joy or pleasure is dependent; for 
if it were not dependent, man would now possess it; 
for what he has faith in as giving joy, gives to him all 
the happiness possible in the moment of his faith. If 
it did not, he could never learn that any joy was de¬ 
pendent. 

XVI. 

It is impossible for man to anticipate any joy beyond 
what he has faith in. If he could, the joy of love 
would be dependent, which is impossible ; for the love 
a man has faith in, at any moment of his existence, he 
possesses. 

XVII. 

No more than one infinity can exist. If there could, 
every thing would be equal to another, which is im¬ 
possible. 

XVIII. 

Any one thing is as infinite to man as are all things, 
because any one thing is as much, beyond the compre¬ 
hension of man as are all things. If it were not so, 
man would be capable of understanding one thing; and 
to understand one thing, he must understand all things, 
which is impossible. 

12 


134 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


XIX. 

Man has no knowledge or conception of infinity; 
because infinity is always to him incomprehensible. If 
it were not incomprehensible, he could understand it; 
and to understand it he must be infinite, or infinity 
must be finite, which is impossible. 

XX. 

Every dependent love is a selfish attachment, because 
selfishness arises in consequence of preferred conditions 
or results, which are changing and uncertain in every 
moment of time ; therefore, for man to prefer anything 
in successive moments of time that there is an uncer¬ 
tainty of his possessing, is a dependent love ; conse¬ 
quently a dependent love is a selfish attachment. 

XXI. 

All the loves of man are selfish attachments, until he 
commences to love his enemies, or to love irrespective 
of condition or results; because conditions and results 
must change, and there is a possibility of his friends 
becoming enemies; hence, making every other love 
dependent, and whatever love is dependent, is a selfish 
attachment. If it is not, there could be no selfish attach¬ 
ments. Therefore, all loves are selfish attachments that 
do not embrace enemies. 


XXII. 

Man is in that condition in every moment of time 
that he should be in, or he can never be in the condition 
he should; for the conditions of life are* changing in 
every moment of time, and they are effects from an 




ILLUSTRATIONS. 


135 


infinity of causes ; ancl to say that one should not be, is 
to say that the infinity of causes and effects should not 
be, or to say that no condition of life should he as it is. 
Therefore, if man is not in the condition in which he 
should be, in one moment of time, he never has or can 
be in any period, past or future. 

XXIII. 

Man possesses in every moment of time what he 
should possess, or he can never possess what he should; 
for what he possesses are effects from the infinity of 
causes and effects; and to say that he should not have 
one thing, is to assert that the infinity of causes and 
effects should not be ; or all that man has in all moments 
of time he should not have. Therefore, if man does 
not possess in one moment what he should, he never 
has or can have what he should in any period, past or 
future. 

XXIV. 

If man does not conform to nature in one moment of 
time, he never can conform to nature ; for to say that 
one action from the infinity of causes and effects is not 
right, is to say that all action is not right, which is the 
same as saying that nothing in nature is right; which is 
equal to the opposite that everything in nature is right 
in all moments of time. 

XXV. 

If it were not for the regular and irregular occur¬ 
rences in nature, man would not be an educated being ; for 
all irregular occurrences destroy to man’s consciousness 
causes, effects, and comparisons ; and hence, all regular 


136 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


occurrences must do the same, for regular occurrences 
could not be known except through irregular ones ; 
therefore, if everything in nature was regular or irregu¬ 
lar, man would not be an educated being. 

XXVI. 

If man conceives of any being superior to himself, 
he must form a selfish attachment; because his concep¬ 
tion of a being superior must come from effects which 
he supposes a superior being capable of producing, 
which is the same as saying that he considers some 
effects as superior to others ; which he has no means of 
proving. Therefore, the calling of any effects superior 
to others arise from the selfish feelings, and conse¬ 
quently man forms a selfish attachment as soon as he 
conceives of a being superior to himself. 

XXVII. 

If man conceives of any being inferior to himself, he 
must form a selfish attachment ; because his conception 
of a being inferior must come through effects which he 
supposes an inferior being capable of producing, which 
is the same as saying he considers some effects as inferior 
to others ; which he has no means of proving. There¬ 
fore, the calling of any effect superior to others arise 
from the selfish feelings, and consequently man forms a 
selfish attachment as soon as he conceives of a being 
inferior to himself. 


XXVIII. 

If man believes he shall ever be in any condition 
superior to what he occupies in the present moment of 



ILLUSTRATIONS. 


137 


time, he has a selfish attachment; because to prove that 
one condition is superior to another, he must prove that 
some effects are superior to others; which he has no 
means of proving ; for every condition is an effect from 
the infinity of causes and effects. Therefore, if man 
believes he shall be in a superior condition in the 
future, he has formed a selfish attachment. 


XXIX. 

If man believes that he can occupy an inferior condi¬ 
tion in one moment of time to that of another, he has a 
selfish attachment ; because to prove that one condition 
is inferior to another, he must prove that some effects 
are inferior to others ; which from the infinity of causes 
and effects, it is impossible for him to prove. There¬ 
fore, if man believes he shall or can know an inferior 
condition to the one he now occupies, he has formed a 
selfish attachment. 

XXX. 

If man would ask the forgiveness of any being, it is 
in consequence of some selfish attachment; for in asking 
forgiveness he supposes himself the cause to some condi¬ 
tion he dislikes, and he does not know one condition as 
superior to another, except through a selfish preference. ^ 

Man, in asking forgiveness, is obliged to suppose that 
he did not act in a previous moment of time, believing 
it to be his joy while he does thus act in all moments 
of time; therefore, he can only ask forgiveness in 
instances where the effect is not his joy, and he can 
not know one effect as superior to another, except 
through a selfish preference. 

Man, in asking forgiveness, is obliged to suppose 


12* 



138 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


that an unnecessary act has been done; and he can not 
prove that one act is more unnecessary than another, 
except through a selfish preference. 

Man, in asking forgiveness, is obliged to suppose that 
he could have done different from what he did; but if 
he could have done different from what he did, he 
copld have acted from a lesser motive than that of the 
strongest, which is impossible. 

XXXI. 

If man prays to God for any future condition or joy 
more than what he possesses in the present moment, he 
has a selfish attachment; because he can not prove one 
condition to be superior to another, and that love he has 
faith in he possesses in the present moment of existence. 

XXXII. 

If man judges another, it is in consequence of some 
selfish attachment; for he can not call one evil or good, 
except from effects that come to his consciousness ; and 
he can not prove that one effect is superior to another, 
except through selfish preferences. 

If man judges another, he must suppose that he is 
acquainted with some unchangeable standard; while 
any standard from which he may judge another, is 
changing to his own conceptions in every moment of 
time, and different in every individual. 

XXXIII. 

A man that can forgive, has a selfish attachment; for 
to say that any man can forgive is to imply that he has 
had cause to be angiy ; and for him to be angry, he must 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


139 


be so in consequence of some effect he dislikes ; and one 
effect can not be preferred to another, except through 
selfish preferences. 

XXXIY. 

If man practices self-sacrifice, patience, or self-denial, 
he has a selfish attachment; for to practice them implies 
that he is obliged to forego some condition which he 
likes, and he can not prefer one condition to another, 
except through selfish preferences. 

XXXY. 

If man would give praise to any persons, or to a 
supposed infinite being, he has a selfish attachment; for 
to give praise implies a conception of superior and 
inferior conditions, which can not be known, except 
through selfish preferences. 

XXXYI. 

If man would seek to join any society, he has a selfish 
attachment; for in joining a society, he would be guided 
in future moments of time by what he now considers 
right; while he can not prefer what he considers right 
in one moment to that of another, except through his 
selfish preferences. 

XXXYII. 

If man would receive any opinions as truth on the 
authority of any persons or books, he has a selfish 
attachment ; for to receive any thing as truth on au¬ 
thority, one must suppose that another is superior to 
himself, which he has no means of proving, except 
through selfish preferences 


140 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


XXXVIII. 

If man would seek to organize any new society or 
government, he has a selfish attachment; for to do this, 
he must anticipate a future superior condition, and one 
condition is not better than another, except through 
selfish preferences. 


XXXIX. 

If man would seek any titles of distinction conferred 
by governments, societies, or schools, he has a selfish 
attachment; for one condition is not superior to another, 
except through selfish preferences. 

XL. 

If man would seek to make himself or others famous, 
or would celebrate any public day, or would call any 
event of the past more important than another, he has 
a selfish attachment; for all of these arise in conse¬ 
quence of preferred conditions. 

XLI. 

If man would read, go to any place, or do any thing 
for his personal gratification, he has a selfish attach¬ 
ment ; for by so doing he is preferring moments in 
time, which he can not do, except through selfish prefer¬ 
ences. 

XLII. 

If man does not suppose that every one is in the con¬ 
dition he should be in every moment of time, he has 
a selfish attachment; for he can not prefer conditions for 
any one, except through selfish preferences. 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


141 


XLIII. 

If man supposes that all do not do whit they should, 
he has a selfish attachment; for he can not prefer the 
effects of one action to that of another, except through 
selfish preferences. 

XLIY. 

If man supposes that others do not discover their sel¬ 
fish acts as fast as they should, he has a selfish attach¬ 
ment*; for he is only displeased with selfish acts through 
effects, which he can not prefer except through selfish 
preferences. 

XLY. 

If man prefers any one kind of labor to another, he 
has a selfish attachment; for he can not prove that one 
kind of labor is superior to another, except through his 
selfish feelings. 

XLYI. 

If man would do anything on account of the opinion 
of others, or to gain the respect or dislike of community, 
he has a selfish attachment; because, by so doing, he 
supposes that standard by which he is judged superior 
or inferior to others to be true, which he has no means 
of proving, except through selfish preferences. 

XLYII. 

If man feels dependent on God, or on any being, for 
any thing, he has a selfish attachment; because to feel 
dependent, he must suppose that there is a possibility of 
his not being protected in some moments of time; and 
he cannot suppose that he will not be protected, except 


142 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


through preferred conditions, which arises through sel¬ 
fish preferences. 

Man, in acknowledging dependence on any being, is 
obliged to presume that the being can do more for him 
than some other beings or things, which he has no 
means of proving, except through selfish preferences. 

If*man should be dependent on any one being or 
thing, he should be dependent on all beings and things ; 
because he has no means of proving that any one thing 
is more a cause to infinite action than all things* and 
to say that he should feel dependent on all beings and 
things, is the same as saying that he should not feel 
dependent on any thing. 

XLYIII. 

To say that one thing is sacred, is to say that all 
things are sacred; for, from the infinity of causes and 
effects, one thing cannot -be shown to be more sacred 
than another ; and to say that all things are sacred, is 
the same as saying that nothing is sacred. 

XLIX. 

If by religion is meant that one man is in a superior 
condition to another, to assert that one man has it is to 
assert that all have it; for man has no means of proving 
that one condition is superior, except through selfish 
preferences; and to say that all have religion, is the 
same as saying that none have it. 

L. 

To say that every thing praises God, is the same as 
saying that nothing praises God. 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


143 


LI. 

If man would prefer one moment in time to another, 
for agreeable or disagreeable sensations, he has a selfish 
attachment; because he cannot show that any thing is 
agreeable or disagreeable to him, except through selfish 
preferences. 

LII. 

The standard by which Tman determines that some 
persons are spirits, is selfish and dependent; because it 
is changing in every moment of time, and different in 
every individual. 

By spirit is implied that some things are finer than 
others ; while man has no means of showing that any 
thing is fine or gross, except from a preferred standard, 
which is constantly changing to his own conceptions. 

LIII. 

If man supposes what he believes as truth will do 
more good than any other belief, he has a selfish attach¬ 
ment ; because, from the infinity of causes and effects, 
he has no means of knowing that one belief will do 
more good than another. 

LIV. 

If man expects joy from any of the conditions or 
changes of life, he has a selfish attachment; for he can 
not prove that one condition or change is superior to 
another, except through selfish preferences. 


LY. 

If man supposes that he is an accountable being or 
a moral agent, he has a selfish attachment; for accoun¬ 
tability and moral agency imply that man can be in 


144 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


conditions which, he should not; and one condition can 
not be shown to be superior to another, except through 
selfish preferences. 

Accountability implies that man has an unchangeable 
standard by which actions can be judged ; while any 
standard to judge from, is changing in every moment 
of time. 

Accountability implies that unnecessary actions can 
take place ; while one action can not be shown to be 
more necessary than another, except through selfish 
preferences. 

To say that all men are accountable for what they do, is 
the same as saying that all men are not acountable lor 
any thing they do; because in both instances man is in 
the same relative condition. 

To say that man is accountable to love for his actions, 
is the same as saying that man should never try to 
love; for accountability to love implies that love should 
always have governed the actions of all men ; while it 
is impossible for love to be known except through sel¬ 
fishness. Hence, to say that love should have governed 
the actions of all men, is the same as saying that love 
should not have governed the actions of any one. 

Accountability implies penalties and rewards ; while 
no penalty can be dreaded, or reward anticipated, 
except through a selfish preference for conditions. 

LVI. 

If man believes in free agency, he has a selfish 
attachment; because free agency must lead man to 
believe that he could do different from what he did, and 
hence, to prefer moments in time. 


ILLUSTRATION S. 


145 


If man supposes that he is a free agent, he has a 
selfish attachment; for free agency implies that con¬ 
ditions and effects are dependent on the human will; 
while man can not show, that any one action in infinity 
is more a cause to certain effects than another, except 
through selfish preferences. 

Free agency implies that man can do different than 
act from the strongest motive ; and to do this, he must 
be capable of acting without any motive, which is im¬ 
possible. 

LYII. 

If man supposes that God has established a moral 
government on the earth, he has a selfish attachment; 
for a government implies laws, and any one law or set 
of laws, that come to the knowledge of man, can not 
be proved superior, except through selfish preferences. 

Any law by which man will undertake to control his 
actions, is changing to his conception in every moment 
of time, and is different to the conception of every in¬ 
dividual. 

LVIII. 

The standard by which poetry is judged to be good or 
bad, is selfish and dependent; because it is different in 
every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

LIX. 

The standard by which any one is judged to be edu¬ 
cated, is selfish and dependent; because it is different 
in every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 


13 


146 


ILLUSTRATIONS, 


LX. 

The standard by which any thing is called beautiful, 
is selfish and dependent ; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXI. 

The standard by which any one is judged to be noble 
and great, is selfish and dependent; because it is differ¬ 
ent in every individual, and changing in every moment 
of time. 

LXII. 

The standard by which any one is judged to be a 
traitor, or a villain, is selfish and dependent; because it 
is different in every individual, and changing in every 
moment of time. 


LXIII. 

The standard by which the world is supposed to be 
progressing, is selfish and dependent; because it is differ¬ 
ent in every individual, and changing in every moment 
of time. 

LXIY. 

The standard by which one man is judged to possess 
more truth than another, is selfish and dependent; 
because it is different in every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time. 

LXY. 

The standard by which one man is judged to have 
done more good than another, is selfish and dependent; 
because it is different in every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time. 


ILLU STRATION S. 


147 


LXVI. 

The standard by which one belief is called superior 
to another, is selfish and dependent; because it is differ¬ 
ent in every individual, and changing in every moment 
of time, 

LXYII. 

The standard by which any system of orthography is 
called superior to another, is selfish and dependent; 
because it is different in every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time. 

LXVIII. 

The standard by which any language is called supe¬ 
rior to another, is selfish and dependent; because it is 
different in every individual, and changing in every 
moment of time. 

LXIX. 

The standard by which any government or organiza¬ 
tion of men is called superior to others, is selfish and 
dependent; because it is different in every individual, 
and changing in every moment of time. 

LXX. 

The standard by which any models in the arts of 
design are called superior to others, is selfish and 
dependent; because is is different in every individ¬ 
ual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXXI. 

The standard by which any country is called superior 
to another, is selfish and dependent; because it is differ- 


148 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


ent in every individual, and changing in every moment 
of time. 

LXXII. 

The standard by which any tribe or nation is called 
superior to another, is selfish and dependent; because it 
is different in every individual, and changing in every 
moment of time. 

LXXIII. 

The standard by which one class of music or sounds 
is called superior to another, is selfish and dependent; 
because it is different in every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time. 

LXXIY. 

The standard by which any scenery or paintings are 
called superior to others, is selfish and dependent; 
because it is different in every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time. 

LXXY. 

The standard by which any one is called an orator or 
a poet, is selfish and dependent; because it is different 
in every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

LXXYI. 

The standard by which any book is called inspired, is 
selfish and dependent; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXXYII. 

The standard by which Christ is called the Son of 
God, is selfish and dependent; because it is different in 
every individual, and changing in every moment of time. 




ILLUSTRATIONS. 


149 


LXXYIII. 

The standard by which all suits at law are decided, 
is selfish and dependent; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXXIX. 

Any of the supposed laws of nature are selfish and 
dependent; because they are different to every indi¬ 
vidual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXXX. 

Any of the supposed laws of harmony are selfish and 
dependent; because they are different to every indi¬ 
vidual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXXXI. 

Any supposed revelations from nature or God, are sel¬ 
fish and dependent; because they are different to every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

LXXXII. 

Any conception of nature or God, is selfish and de¬ 
pendent ; for it is different in every individual, and 
changing in every moment of time. 

LXXXIII. 

Any standard by which one position in society is 
called superior, is selfish and dependent: because it is 
different in every individual, and changing in every 
moment of time. 

LXXXIY. 

The standard by which rewards and penalties are 
given, is selfish and dependent ,* because it is different 


13 * 


150 


ILLUSTRATION S. 


in every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

LXXXY. 

All laws and rules, by which governments or organ¬ 
izations of men are controlled, are selfish and depend¬ 
ent ; because they are different to every individual, and 
changing in every moment of time to the conceptions 
of man. 

LXXXYI. 

All rules by which religious or military organizations 
of men are controlled, are selfish and dependent; be¬ 
cause they are different to every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time to the conceptions of man. 

LXXXYII. 

The standard by which agreeable or disagreeable sen¬ 
sations are known, is selfish and dependent; because it 
is different to every individual, and changing in every 
moment of time. 

LXXXYIII. 

The standard by which the Bible is known as a holy 
book, is selfish and dependent; because it is different in 
every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

LXXXIX. 

The standard by which a person is called fashionable, 
is selfish and dependent; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

xc. 

The standard by which a man is known to conduct 
himself with propriety, is selfish and dependent ; be- 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


151 


cause it is different in every individual, and changing in 
every moment of time. 


XCI. 

The standard by which a man is called religious, is 
selfish and dependent; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

XCII. 

The standard by which God is known as a being of 
love, is selfish and dependent; because it is different in 
every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

XCIII. 

Any standard by which the world is supposed to be 
improving in the arts and sciences, is selfish and depend¬ 
ent ; because it is different in every individual, and 
changing in every moment of time. 

XCIY. 

The standard by which individuals are called respect¬ 
able, is selfish and dependent ; because it is different in 
every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

XCY. 

Every anticipation of joy is selfish and dependent; 
because it is different to every individual, and changing 
in every moment of time. 

XCYI. 

If man should praise any one being or thing, he 
should praise all beings and things ; because he can not 


ILLUSTRATI ON S. 


152 

prove that one thing more than another is a cause to 
any thing he likes or dislikes. To say that man should 
praise all things, is the same as saying he should not 
praise any thing. 


XCVII. 

To say that any one thing is wrong, is to say that all 
things are wrong ; for one action can not be proved to 
be superior in its effects to that of another ; and to say 
that all things are wrong, is the same as saying that 
nothing is wrong. 


XCYIII. 

To say that one thing is right, is the same as saying 
that all things are right; for one action can not be proved 
to be superior to another in its effects. 

XCIX. 

The standard by which any thing is decided to be 
right or wrong, is selfish and dependent; because it is 
different to every individual, an(j changing in every 
moment of time. 

C. 

The standard by which any action is called just, is 
selfish and dependent; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

CI. 

To call any action evil, is to call all action evil; for 
there is no means of proving that one action does more 
evil or good than another ; and to say that all action is 
evil, is the same as saying that all action is good. 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


153 


CII. 

The standard by which any action is called evil or 
good, is selfish and dependent; because it is different in 
every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

cm. 

The standard by which any individual is known to be 
moral or virtuous, is selfish and dependent; because it 
is different in every individual, and changing in every 
moment of time. 

CIY. 

The standard by which man is supposed to possess a 
religious, moral, intellectual, physical, <or organic nature, 
is selfish and dependent; because it is different in every 
individual, and changing in every moment of time. 

cv. 

The standard by which any thing is called truth and 
error, is selfish and dependent; because it is different 
in every individual, and changing in every moment of 
time. 

CYI. 

To say that any one’opinion is erroneous, is to say 
that all opinions are erroneous ; for man has no means 
of proving that one opinion is more erroneous than an¬ 
other ; and to say that all opinions are erroneous, is the 
same* as saying that all opinions are truths. 

CYII. 

The standard of love is not selfish and dependent; 
because it is not different in every individual, and 
changing in every moment of time. 


154 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


CYIII. 

The standard by which any action is called an act of 
love or an act of selfishness, is not selfish and depend¬ 
ent ; because it is not different in every individual, and 
changing in every moment of time. 

CIX. 

To say that any one action of infinity is a manifesta¬ 
tion of selfishness, is to say that all action of infinity is 
a manifestation of selfishness; and to say that all action 
of infinity is a manifestation of selfishness, is the same 
as saying that all action of infinity is a manifestation of 
love. 


PART II. 


ARTICLE I. 

THE GODS. 

Every selfish love is to man a God. That God for 
which he has the strongest attachment, is the God upon 
which he most depends to bring to him the joys of life. 
Man has as many Gods as he has selfish loves; and he 
cannot prove any one to be superior to another. What¬ 
ever he has faith in as giving joy, is a God, excepting 
he has faith in love ; for love does not acknowledge any 
attachment to conditions, opinions, superior or inferior 
beings, or acts. Hence, whoever has a God, must ac¬ 
knowledge a selfish feeling, and must be seeking for 
joys that are dependent on the changes of life. 


ARTICLE II. 

THE GOD OF THANKS OR GRATITUDE. 

Would man praise God, and those who give him pres¬ 
ents ? Would man call God stingy if he did not re¬ 
ceive presents ? 

Would man give to God praise for destroying his 
enemies ? Would man praise the name of a hired 
assassin ? 



156 GOD OF THANKS, ETC. 

Would man praise God if lie had written a book ? 
Would man blame God if he could not have finished 
his book ? 

Would man praise God because he had been per¬ 
mitted to see the light of another day ? Would man 
blame God if he was to die to-morrow ? 

Would man dedicate a church to God ? Would man 
give to wolves sheep ? 

Would man praise God because he was permitted to 
worship Him ? Ought the heathen to blame God ? 

Would man hope for pleasant weather if he was 
going a journey ? Would man blame God if it rained ? 

Would man thank God for his good appearance ? 
Would man blame God if he was deformed ? 

Would man thank God for his good health ? Would 
man blame God for sickness ? 

Would man thank God for prosperity ? Would man 
blame God for poverty ? 

Would man serve God in order to be famous ? 
Would man despise God if he was ignoble ? 

Would man thank God if he was in easy circum¬ 
stances ? Would man blame God if he was oppressed ? 

Would man praise God if he was able to travel ? 
Would man blame God if he was confined at home ? 

Would man praise God if he was able to marry ? 
Would man blame God if he was to live alone ? 

Would man praise God if the world called him 
great ? Would man blame God if the world called 
him simple ? 

Would man thank God for his good name ? Would 
man curse God if he was without a name ? 

Would man thank God for the wide spread of his 


GOD OF THANKS, ETC. 157 

belief ? Would man curse God if all ridiculed bis con¬ 
ceptions of truth ? 

Would man praise or curse God for children ? 

Would man praise or curse God if he was flattered ? 

Would man praise or curse God if he was elected to 
office ? 

Would man praise or curse God if he lived in the 
country ? 

Would man praise or curse God if he lived in the 
city? 

Would a man praise or curse God if he lived among 
savages ? 

Would man praise or curse God if he should be in 
danger of loosing his life ? 

Man thanks God for the possession of those things 
for which he has a selfish attachment. Man, in praying 
for a future heaven, can not show that the heaven he 
would seek is better than the hell he would avoid. In 
thanking God for things, he the same as says that those 
things for which he expresses his gratitude, are to him 
of the most importance. He can not show that the 
existence of any one thing, or his possession of any one 
thing, is of more importance than the existence or pos¬ 
session of any thing else. Man may thank God because 
he is able to own a house; he can not prove it to be of 
more importance than his possession of a glass of water ; 
neither can he show that one is a greater good than the 
other. Man can not show that the existence of those 
things or conditions, for which he thanks God, are of 
more importance, or are more productive of good than 
the existence of those things or conditions for which he 
prays God to remove. Hence, it is impossible for man 


158 GOD OF THANKS, ETC. 

to render thanks to God for any thing, except for the 
objects of his selfish loves. If man thanks God for his 
present condition, it is because that condition is preferred 
to others ; and he can show no reason for preferring one 
condition to that of another, except through his selfish 
feelings. If man thanks God because he is rich, it is 
because he prefers riches to poverty; while he has no 
means of proving that riches are better than poverty. If 
man thanks God for any thing he possesses, it is because 
he prefers the thing he possesses in one moment of 
time to what he possesses in another; which he has no 
means of showing to be superior, except through his 
attachments. Therefore, it is selfish in man to thank 
God for any one thing he possesses more than another, 
or for any one condition in which he may be placed 
more than another; for he can not show that any one 
thing or condition is more productive of evil or good 
than another. To say that man should thank God for 
every thing, is the same as saying that he should not 
thank God for any thing. 

Every feeling of gratitude towards God, angels, 
Christ, or individuals, is selfish, and will interfere with 
acts of love. A manifestation of gratitude is a mani¬ 
festation of a selfish attachment. Man can not show 
that he should feel any more gratitude in receiving a 
fortune than he should for breathing the air, or in con¬ 
sequence of the taking place of any event, or of the 
existence of any thing. He who has feelings of grati¬ 
tude, will feel them according to the strength of his 
attachment for the thing he receives. If man has no 
attachment for any thing, he can manifest no gratitude. 
Man may not feel any gratitude for any gifts or events 


GOD OF RELIGION. 


159 


of life, and have equally as strong an attachment for the 
objects of his desire. 

It is selfish to appoint a day of thanksgiving and 
prayer in consequence of any benefits received. 

It is selfish in those who receive donations or pres¬ 
ents, to feel any gratitude for them, or to seek to express 
their thanks in any public manner. 

It is selfish in any one to feel any gratitude for any 
thing that takes place. 

It is selfish to feel any gratitude towards God, Holy 
Ghost, or Christ, because Christ came into the world, or 
died for the world, or brought immortality to light. 

It is selfish in any nations or individuals to feel any 
gratitude to God, angels, generals, or armies, for any 
victory or successful termination of any contest. 

It is selfish in God to send any judgments on any 
nation, tribe, or individuals, because they do not mani¬ 
fest gratitude to Him. 


ARTICLE III. 

THE GOD OF RELIGION. 

Can man find religion in the country, the city, at 
Jerusalem, the church, in the evening meeting of ex¬ 
citement, or in the places where they pray and sing ? 

Does man wish religion for the sake of respectability, 
riches, prosperity, love, heaven, joy, learning, or 
wisdom ? 

Can a man bring religion in on Sunday, carry it out 



160 


GOD OF RELIGION. 


on Monday, bring it back in the evening, keep it out 
of business and politics, carry it to the house of mourn¬ 
ing, and hire a minister to keep it during the week ? 

Can man make religion fashionable and respectable ? 
Can he make it the friend of the rich and poor ? Will 
it hide sexual indulgence, excuse massacre, help to 
victory in battle, make a nation prosperous, keep 
slaves in subjection, excuse drinking and smoking, 
exterminate the savages ? 

Has religion been kept with the Jews, the Samari¬ 
tans, the Assyrians, the Chinese, the Arabians, the 
Hindoos, the New Zealanders ? 

Has the religion of man cost the extermination of 
nations, the * assassination of kings, the burning of 
men, travel to distant cities, expenditure in col¬ 
lecting manuscripts, time in endeavoring to compre¬ 
hend how God dealt with the ancients, travel to con¬ 
vocations, money in building palaces, cathedrals, and 
churches, — money in supporting bishops, elders, and 
preachers ? 

What does it cost to give religion to the rich, poor, 
philosophers, professors, ministers, bishops, idiots, the 
insane, thieves, gamblers, prisoners, slaves, harlots, 
enemies, savages, and to the heathen ? 

Will religion save from suffering the sick, the dying, 
the murderer, the thief, the libertine, and the harlot ? 

Can a man live and die with religion ? Can he fight 
with it ? Will it give him courage in argument, and 
make him strong in battle ? Is it a good thing to carry 
to the poor and to the heathen ? 

Can man seek religion in a barrel, a church, a cellar, 
in the minister’s house, in a book, or with the poor ? 


GOD OF POSITION . 


161 


Can man keep religion with him when he dances, 
does business, buys a new garment, or sells a farm. 

Can religion make a man serious, joyous, funny, 
laugh, and weep ? Can it make him support the preach¬ 
er and build the church ? Can it make him fall on his 
knees to pray ? Can it make him careful, faithful, 
love God, and prevent him from cheating ? 

Religion is different in every individual, and chang¬ 
ing in every individual’s conception in every moment of 
time. Every man’s religion must be adopted through 
some standard ; which he can not prove to be superior to 
the standard adopted by any other person, because joy 
can not be proved to be better than misery, or love 
better than selfishness. 


ARTICLE IV. 

THE GOD OF POSITION. 

Does man wish for money to make him respectable, 
certain kinds of clothes to make him fashionable, cer¬ 
tain accomplishments to give him notoriety ? 

Is it better to be in a wholesale than in a retail estab¬ 
lishment, to be an importer than a jobber, to sell a 
hogshead of sugar than a few pounds, to own vessels 
than canal boats, to own a plantation than a garden, 
to deal in silks than in vegetables, to go to the 
exchange than to peddle wooden ware. Is a client of a 
thousand dollars of more consequence than a client of 
four shillings ? Is it better to preach over a rich society 
than to give pennies to a child ? Is it better to visit 


14* 



1 62 


GOD OF POSITION. 


the fashionable to give medicine than to give it to 
harlots ? 

Would man rather be a professor in college than a 
teacher in a common school, a preacher th^n a class 
leader, a physician than a nurse, a bishop than an 
elder, a lawyer at a higher than at an inferior court, 
a senator than a representative, a president than a gov¬ 
ernor, a king than a baron ? 

Would man like a large and showy house better than 
a small one ? 

Would man prefer to live in a fashionable street than 
in an obscure one ? 

Would man rather make visits to the governor than 
to the poor ? 

Would man rather his wife was a proficient in music 
than a good house-keeper ? 

Would manlike carpets better than painted floors ? 

Would man feel better with fashionable clothes than 
with old ones ? 

Every position which a man seeks in society, is a 
selfish love. Man can not show that he can do any more 
good or evil in one position than in another ; and hence, 
he can not seek any one in preference, except through 
his selfish attachments. It is selfish in man to prefer 
any one position in society to that of another; and it 
would be selfish for him to refuse to occupy any position, 
except the occupying of it made necessary a selfish 
condition. 




GOD OF THE ILLS OF LIFE. 163 

ARTICLE Y. 

THE GOD OF THE ILLS OF LIFE. 

Will man pray God that he may be released from his 
burdens ? • 

Will man pray that the cause of his grief may be 
removed ? 

Will man pray that he may be taken from his poverty ? 

Will man pray that none of the ills of life may afflict 
him ? 

Is the God of man a tyrant, that he constantly afflicts 
him ? Man, to be free, should not seek to escape the ills 
of life by leaving them; for as long as he is in a selfish 
condition, go where he may, they are likely to afflict 
him. What he calls the ills of life, are so through his 
selfish attachments. He is unhappy because he is 
deprived of conditions which he loves. To be free, he 
must have no preference for conditions; but seek to be 
faithful from his love, in whatever condition placed, 
and then he will not see the ills of life. 


ARTICLE YI. 

THE GOD OF IMPORTANCE. 

Is man waiting to see the angels ? 

Is man waiting to go to heaven ? 

Is man waiting to go to church ? 

Is man waiting for prayers ? 

Is man waiting for medicine ? 



164 


GOD OF IMPORTANCE. 


Is man waiting for evening ? 

Is man waiting for the carriage ? 

Is man waiting for a legacy ? 

Is man waiting for a situation ? 

Is man waiting until he is married ? 

Does God talk to the prophets, speak to man in the 
evening, live in heaven, wear a crown, sit in high 
places ? 

Is God waiting for the Golden Age, for the regenera¬ 
tion of man, to send men in golden armor, to send 
brides and bridegrooms to the earth ? 

Man can not prove that any one act of life has a 
greater result than another, or that any one moment of 
life is more important than another ; he can not show 
he has done more, if he writes a book, than if he had 
done any thing else. 

If man sees any one moment or any one of his acts 
to be more important than another, he is in a selfish 
condition ; because he can not prove that one moment 
or act is of more importance. It is in the present mo¬ 
ment that man must know the joy of love; and that 
present moment must be all the successive moments of 
time. Man can not be free if he is waiting or expect¬ 
ing something important, or if he has not faith that 
one moment or age is as important as another. 

It is selfish in man to expect any more joy in one 
moment of time than in another ; for by so doing, he 
prefers moments in time. 

It is selfish to seek for any enjoyment, pleasure, or 
amusement; for by so doing, moments in time are 
preferred. 

It is selfish in man to be attache^ to any kind of 


GOD OF IMPORTANCE. 


165 


music or sounds; for he is led to prefer moments in 
time. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to his meals, or any 
class of food or drinks; for these attachments will lead 
him to prefer moments in time. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to drinking liquors, 
or to the use of tobacco, or any narcotic ; for these 
attachments will lead him to prefer moments in time. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that any being ever 
done any act more important than any one of his own 
acts ; for if he does, he is led to prefer moments in time. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that God, angels, Jesus 
Christ, or the ancient dead, ever done any thing more 
important than any one of his own acts ; for if he does, 
he is led to prefer moments in time. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that any one of his 
own acts are more important than others, or more im¬ 
portant than the acts of any person that ever lived ; for 
if he does, he is led to prefer moments in time. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to any persons or 
things, in preference to others ; for if he is, he is led to 
prefer moments in time. 

To be free, man should be faithful in the condition in 
which he finds himself; and in doing this, he is obliged 
to take notice of the events and things about him. But 
his interest in these events and things should not be 
through the selfish feelings, but through his love. While 
he is faithful in love, and doing the acts of love, he can 
not presume that those things in which he is engaged are 
more important than other things, or that the events of 
his own life are more important than the events of the 
life of others. 


166 


GOD OF IMPORTANCE. 


It was selfish in the voice from heaven to say, 
“ Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from 
henceforth.” 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say that there was 
joy in heaven over a sinner that repented. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say that he would go 
to prepare a place for his disciples. 

It was selfish in God to promise Abraham that 
through his seed all the nations of the earth should be 
blessed. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to any particular 
mode of doing any thing; for by so doing he is led to 
prefer moments in time. 

It is selfish to be attached to any mode of burying 
the dead. 

It is selfish to be attached to any particular kind of 
houses. 

It is selfish to be attached to any kind of dress. 

It is selfish to have any attachment for personal 
appearance. 

It is selfish to be attached to any class of believers. 

It is selfish to be attached to a particular church. 

It is selfish to be attached to a particular name or 
sect. 

It is selfish to form any attachment to Jesus Christ, 
Paul, God, or to any being or things. 

It is selfish to always be in haste in doing any thing, 
in order to commence doing something else. 


PROUD GOD. 


167 


ARTICLE VII. 

THE PROUD GOD. 

Would man rather say that his minister was a doctor 
of divinity, than to say he was despised by the learned ? 

Would man rather say that his friend was a professor, 
than to say he was a peddler ? 

Would man rather say that his friend was sent 
ambassador to a foreign country, than to say that he 
suffered imprisonment in an unpopular cause ? 

Would man rather say that he lived in a large city, 
than in a town unknown ? 

Would man rather say that he lived in a costly man¬ 
sion, than in a log cabin ? 

Would man rather tell the world that hecould ; wear 
jewelry in a becoming manner, than to say that he was 
not able to wear it ? 

Would man rather tell the world that he vned 
many acres of land, was rich, famous for writing books, 
or the leader of a sect, than to say that he possessed 
none of these things ? 

Would man rather tell the world, that he was a 
heavy speculator, than to say that he was always 
cheated ? 

Would man rather tell the world that he was an 
importer of merchandise, than to say he was a cobbler ? 

Would man rather be seen in the society of a well 
dressed lady, than to be seen helping a drunkard rise 
from the earth ? 

Would man rather be seen in the society of a gover¬ 
nor, than to be seen leading a harlot from her home ? 


Would man rather be seen with a fine dress on a fash¬ 
ionable street, than to be seen in a hospital of the poor ? 

Would man rather excite the envy of others at his 
position, than to call out their love by an act of kindness ? 

Would man rather be seen in the society of the 
wealthy, than in the society of the indigent ? 

Would man rather be seen with professors, doctors of 
divinity, doctoi^ of laws, than to be seen with those 
without a name ? 

Would man rather be seen in a fashionable church, 
than speaking kind words to a ragged child ? 

Would man rather be seen at a fashionable party, than 
to be seen among outcasts and bondmen? 

Man has no reason for pride, except through his sel¬ 
fish feelings. He who loves, must see all possessing 
what 1° *iv them, and for their good. If man has much 
trut 1 id i.lth, or fame, he can not show that he possesses 
m mties than any one else; and he can not become 

im .o himself or others, except through the selfish 

fpp 0 >. The relations about every one are infinite, 
and no one understands them, consequently, one being 
can not show that he is receiving more than another, or 
is more beautiful. If man has faith in love, he will be¬ 
lieve that every one is in the condition they should be 
in every moment of time, and that no one condition is 
superior to that of another. There is nothing that takes 
place that should exalt or degrade man ; for he can not 
prove that one man is better, or more beautiful, or 
possesses more than another, except through some stand¬ 
ard which he adopts to judge ; which standard he can 
not prove to be true or false, or to be superior to that 
adopted by any other person. 


t5t)D OF PRAYER 


169 


ARTICLE VIII. 


THE GOD OF PRAYER, 


It is selfish in man to praise God. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to save him from sin, 
sorrow, or despair. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to save him from sick¬ 
ness or death. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to save him from the 
assassin. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to preserve his life 
at sea. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to save the life of his 
wife, father, mother, sister, brother, or child. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to restore hf 
health. • 

’t 

It is selfish in man to ask God for prosperity. ' 

It is selfish in man to ask God to save him fro 
calamities. 

It is selfish in man to ask God to save him from 
starvation. 

It is selfish in man to ask God for bread, clothing, 


or a house to live in. 

It is selfish in man to pray that his property may be 
saved from dangers. 

It is selfish in man to thank God that He has spared 
his life. 

If God was presumed to be finite, it would not be 
more selfish to ask God for any thing than it would be 
to ask man, providing man had no attachment for the 
thing sought, but presumed it to be a good. But in 


..v 


170 


GOD OF PRAYER, 


praying to God as the infinity of causes and effects, it is 
implied that it is possible for something to take place 
that would not be a manifestation of love ; a*id hence, 
in praying man must pray for selfish attachments ; for 
he cannot presume that God will not do as he should, 
without fears that he will interfere with some of his 
selfish attachments. 

It is selfish in man to pray to God not to lead him 
into temptation; because it is impossible for him to be 
tempted by any thing which he has faith prevents his 
joy. Man can not be tempted to do any thing, except 
he believes there is some joy in it ; and consequently, 
the same selfish influences that prevent him from doing 
evil will cause him to do the same evil under other 
circumstances. Man can not prove that he is in a less 
selfish condition when he overcomes any temptation, 
than when he does not. In both instances he has a 
selfish attachment to effects. Man can not overcome a 
temptation through love, because in loving he would 
not be tempted ; and hence, he overcomes a temptation 
through an attachment to some effect, which he believes 
to be more preferable than the joy that tempts him. 
When man prays to God not to lead him into tempta¬ 
tion, he has faith in selfish desires as giving joy, and he 
does not wish to indulge in them because he has an at¬ 
tachment to some other effects which he prefers. Man 
may not wish to indulge in his selfish desires because 
he may fear, if he does, he shall loose position in soci¬ 
ety, or a future heaven, which it is selfish in him to 
fear. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to give to his disciples 
any form of prayer. 


PREFERRED GOD. 


171 


It was selfish in Jesus Christ to teach his disciples to 
pray after the manner of the “ Lord’s Prayer.” 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to exhort the people to 
pray for those who despitefully used them. 

It was selfish in the disciples of Jesus Christ to pray, 
or to teach others to pray to God. 


AETICLE IX. 

THE PREFERRED GOD. 

Will man thank God that he is not a hypocrite ? Is 
any one free from selfishness ? 

Will man weep for the degraded ? Is any one pure ? 

Will man lament over the wicked ? Is any one 
among the good ? 

Will man say the people have been misled ? Are the 
paths of any one straight ? 

Does man say, the poor ? Is any one rich ? 

Does man say, the foolish ? Is any one wise ? 

Does man say, the fanatical ? Has any one found 
rest ? 

Does man say, the slaves ? Has any one found liberty ? 

Will man thank God for his present condition ? Has 
one more wealth than another ? 

Will man thank God that he is a teacher ? Has God 
appointed one man to teach more than another ? 

Will man carry a banner in the procession ? Does 
any one go as a common citizen ? 

Will man tell the people if they do not worship God 
they shall be damned ? Is any one saved ? 



172 PREFERRED GOD. 

Will man tell the people they have been led from 
nature ? Does nature delight in any one ? 

Will man tell the people that all truth necessary is in 
the Bible ? Can a man judge God ? 

Will man tell the people that the Bible is the only 
message of God to the world ? Can a man talk with 
God? 

Will man tell the people that unbelievers in the Bible 
shall be damned ? Can man tell God what to do ? 

Will man tell the people that God rested on Sunday ? 
Can man see God asleep ? 

Will man tell" the people to believe in necessity ? Can 
a man talk with God about what the people should 
believe ? 

Will man say that harlots are forsaken creatures ? Is 
God’s light shining on any one? 

Will man say the drunkard’s condition is very dis¬ 
tressing ? Is any one free from the ills of life ? 

Will man say that hypocrites must see great sorrow ? 
Is any one free ? 

Will man thank God because there is more truth now 
than a thousand years ago ? Does man talk with God 
about the light of the present age ? 

Will man thank God that he is not a scorner of the 
truth ? Has any one been elected to sit in a high seat ? 

Will man thank God because he is able to teach the 
truth ? Who discovered truth ? 

Will man thank God because he is able to read his 
word ? Is a man that can not read damned ? 

Will man thank God for success in life ? Does God 
dislike those who have ill luck ? 

Will man say that truth is now*known more than at 


PREFERRED GOD. 


173 


any other time ? Does man have messages from God to 
tell him the news ? 

Man has no means of showing that he is of more 
value than the sparrows Or the grass. He can not show 
that he is more a cause or an effect to any thing, than 
any creature or thing in the universe. He can not show 
that he, God, or angels can do more good or evil than a 
grain of sand. Hence, man in any condition, whether 
good or evil, honorable or dishonorable, pure or degra¬ 
ded, can not prefer himself to any thing, except as an 
act of selfishness. Man has no means of showing that 
it is actually a good to be pure or free, more than it is 
to be in degradation and in bondage. Hence, it is 
selfish to assume that one is better than the other, or is 
more a manifestation of love. Man can not show that 
his condition is superior to the grass or the grain of 
sand ; hence, for him to assume that his condition is supe¬ 
rior, is selfish. He can not show that his condition is a 
good, or more productive of good or evil than that of any 
creature or thing in the universe. He can not show 
that his life is of more consequence than that of the 
grass or the stone, or the vegetable and animal life upon 
which he feeds. Man has. no means of showing that 
his God prefers him in preference to the animal or the 
*" grain, or that his condition is superior, or that he does 
more evil or good, or that the universe needs him any 
more, or that he is more a manifestation of love. Hence, 
when man assumes that he is superior, or is preferred 
before any thing else in the universe, he is in a selfish 
condition. 

Man having a conscious life, over which he must 
be faithful from his love, in order to be free, can 


15* 


174 


PREFERRED GOD. 


not consciously refuse to live, except as an act of selfish¬ 
ness ; and hence, he can not refuse to consume animal 
and vegetable life to support his own. Every thing 
that exists to the consciousness of man, exists as an 
effect. The existence of man is an effect from causes ; 
and so is the existence of every thing that he consumes 
in order to support life ; hence, man is not under the 
necessity of preferring himself to the animal or vegetable 
life which he consumes to support his own, because his 
own life, as well as the existence of every thing, is an 
effect from causes which he is unable to trace. Man 
can not show that any creature or thing has more or 
less of life than himself. The life of the grain is an effect 
from some previous life, and its continued existence is 
an effect from previous life; and in like manner is the 
existence of man, and of every thing else to his con¬ 
sciousness. Man can not prove that he does any more 
in causing and continuing the existence of animal and 
vegetable life, than they do towards causing and con¬ 
tinuing his. Man does not prefer in the instance of 
destroying vegetable or animal life, to support his own, — 
his life to that of the vegetable or animal, any more 
than does the tree prefer its own life to the life it con¬ 
sumes to support its own. The only difference is, that 
one act is conscious and the other unconscious. Man 
can have no conception of the existence of any thing 
except some previous life has been brought to support 
it, or what is the same, that it is an effect preceded by 
some cause. Hence, it is selfish in him to prefer him¬ 
self to any thing else, or to prefer any thing else to 
himself. 

It is selfish in man to prefer his own existence to the 


PREFERRED GOD. 


175 


existence of any being or thing in the universe. It is 
selfish in man to prefer the existence of any being or 
thing in the universe to that of his own. 

It is selfish in man to prefer his own condition to that 
of any being. It is selfish in man to prefer the condi¬ 
tion of any being to that of his own. 

It is selfish in man to prefer his own life to that of 
any other being. It is selfish in man to take his life in 
preference to that of any other being. 

It is selfish in man to prefer that any person should 
be laughed at, scorned, reviled, punished, — should be a 
traitor, a villain, a murderer, in preference to himself. 
It is selfish in man to prefer any of these conditions for 
himself in preference to any one else. 

It is selfish in man to prefer that he shall be rich, 
famous, or comfortable, in preference to any one else. 
It is selfish in man to prefer that any one else should 
be in these conditions in preference to himself. 

It was selfish in God to prefer that Jesus Christ 
should die for the world in preference to any one else. 
It is selfish in man to prefer Christ to be the Son of 
God in preference to any one else. 

It is selfish in God to prefer to be worshipped in 
preference to any other being. It is selfish to worship 
God in preference to any other being. 

It is selfish in God to prefer heaven to hell. It is 
selfish in Satan to prefer hell to heaven. 




176 


GOD OF MAS. 


AETICLE X. 

THE GOD OF MAN. 

Do the wicked go to hell ? Do the free toil for the 
righteous ? 

Will those who belieye not in Christ be damned ? 
Do the pure try to elevate the degraded ? 

Will Christ send the wicked into everlasting burn¬ 
ings ? Can Christ escape judgment ? 

Would man like to be saved from hell ? Where can 
Christ go to labor ? 

Will man go to church to find Christ l Has Christ 
ceased advising harlots ? 

Will man pray to be saved from hell ? Does man 
know where he can find the righteous ? 

Did Christ die for the wicked ? Is Christ now at 
work for the pure ? 

Will man sing praises to God because he is good ? 
Will man caress his house because he is spirited ? 

Would man enter the streets of the New Jerusalem ? 
Would man like gold and the government of a city ? 

Will the blood of Christ wash away sins ? Can 
Christ free prisoners ? 

Can Christ cover a man’s sins ? Can Christ’s charac¬ 
ter be impeached ? 

Did Christ die to appease God’s wrath ? Does man 
pray for God’s repentance ? 

Is God angry with those who do not worship him ? 
Has God exalted himself? 

Does God unwillingly afflict sinners ? Is God 
afraid ? 




GOD OF MAN. 177 

Does God will that all men should be saved ? Can 
God get into trouble ? 

Did God rest on Sunday ? Can God hire out to 
work ? 

Did it take God six periods of time to make the 
world ? Can God chop wood for the poor ? 

Does God grieve about the wicked ? Can God be 
comforted ? 

Is Christ the only son of God ? Is God married ? 

Is Christ a mediator between God and man ? Will 
honey pacify God ? 

Is Christ a part of God ? Has God parents ? 

Did God send Christ to die for the world ? Can God 
pay laborers in current money ? 

Did God tell Moses to deliver the Israelites from bon¬ 
dage? Does God wish to tell the people what he 
can do ? 

Did God tell the Egyptians to keep their slaves ? 
Can God be a minister at a foreign court ? 

Did God drive Adam and Eve from the garden of 
Eden ? Does God have any misunderstandings ? 

Did God give to the Israelites the land of Canaan ? 
Is God avaricious ? 

Did God tell Abraham that through him he would 
bless all nations? Is God stronger sometimes than 
at others ? 

Man sees God as he sees every thing, through his 
development. He may say what God is and does, but 
he can only give his conceptions; for no one man knows 
more of an infinite being, was ever nearer to him, or 
had a closer communication with him than another. 
If man is selfish, mercenary, or a lover of conditions, so 


178 


INFALLIBLE GOD. 


must lie represent his God. Man endeavoring to speak 
of an infinite being, must give his limited conceptions ; 
consequently, he always speaks of a finite being. Any 
assertion that can be made of an infinite being, or of in¬ 
finity, by way of specifying qualities or actions, will be 
equal to the opposite of the same assertion. 

To say that God is omnipotent, is the same as saying 
that God is powerless. 

To say that God is omniscient, is the same as saying 
that God does not know any thing. 

To say that God is omnipresent, is the same as say¬ 
ing that God is no where present in the universe. 

To say that God is perfect or infallible, is the same as 
saying that God is imperfect or fallible. 

To say that God is a being of love, is the same as 
saying that God is a being of selfishness. 

To say that God created all things, is the same as 
saying that God did not create any thing. 

To say that God exists, is the same as saying that 
God does not exist. 


ARTICLE XI. 

THE INFALLIBLE GOD. 

"Would man declare the true God to the heathen ? 
Can man carry God in a basket ? 

Has an enemy blasphemed God ? Can God get into 
trouble ? 

If a person violates the faith will he be turned out of 
church ? Ho the free go to the despised ? 



INFALLIBLE GOD. 


179 


Did Christ die to save sinners ? Can man eat and 
save another from starvation ? 

Will whoever blasphemes against the Holy Ghost be 
damned ? Does God get angry ? 

Are the wicked in the hands of the devil ? Does 
God fight about possessions ? 

Is the devil continually seeking the ungodly ? Does 
God live in heaven ? 

Did the devil disgrace the race of man through Eve ? 
Does God keep a strict watch over his creatures ? 

Is the devil fighting against God ? Can God use the 
sword ? 

Has any one had a message from God ? Does God 
write with a pen ? 

Did the Bible come from God ? Can God publish 
books ? 

Was Paul inspired to write from God ? Can God 
talk to his friends ? 

Is the Bible a sacred book ? Has God likes and 
dislikes ? 

Did God swear by Himself, because he could find 
none greater ? Can God know shame ? 

Ought man to partake of bread and wine in remem¬ 
brance of Christ’s sufferings ? Ought any one to put 
heavy burdens on children from alms-houses ? 

Will God build up Zion ? Can God be kept quiet ? 

Will God revive his people ? Can the people 
inform God they are doing well ? 

Will God have a season of revival ? Can God wait 
for good teachers ? 

Man can not show that any act of his life is fallible 
or infallible, because he can not show that any standard 


180 


INFALLIBLE GOD. 


from which he may judge is correct. Either every act 
of infinity is fallible or infallible; for to prove any one 
act fallible or infallible, is to prove all acts to be the 
same. If any one act is fallible, all acts are fallible ; 
and to say that all acts are fallible is the same as saying 
that all acts are infallible. Because man undertakes to 
accomplish certain ends, and fails, it does not show that 
his acts are fallible, or, that there is a being in existence 
that does accomplish every thing he undertakes. If 
there is a being in existence whose will always takes 
place, it does not prove that the acts of that being are 
infallible any more than the acts of a being whose will 
does not always take place. It is impossible for man 
to have any conception of infallibility, except through 
some standard by which to judge ; and any standard he 
may judge from he is obliged to assume, or to take the 
assumption of some other person, and he has no means of 
proving it to be true or false. Hence, man in speaking of 
fallible or infallible beings or acts, speaks of them 
through his conceptions, and represents them all alike, 
as fallible or infallible. Man can not prove that any 
one being is more fallible or infallible than another of 
whom he has a conception. Man in speaking of a fal¬ 
lible being, represents him the same as when speaking 
of an infallible being; and in speaking of an infallible 
being, he represents him the same as a fallible being. 
Therefore, to the conception of man all beings and acts 
are fallible, or all beings and acts are infallible. 


INFINITE GOD. 


181 


ARTICLE XII. 

THE INFINITE GOD. 

Does man ask God that he may live longer ? When 
ought man to die ? 

Does man ask God to keep him and family from star¬ 
vation ? How ought man to die ? 

Does man ask God to have his corn grow ? What 
ought God to do with bad seed corn ? 

Does man ask God for fame ? What course ought 
God to take to make a man famous ? 

Does man ask God that the people may come up and 
join the church ? Is God rather slow about working ? 

Does man ask God that the people may believe in 
Christ as his only Son ? Does God dislike children, 
that he did not have more of them ? 

Does man ask God that the people may believe that 
Paul was inspired ? Is God indifferent about bestowing 
preferments ? 

Does man ask God to tell the pe ople they shall he 
damned if they do not worship him ? Can God be 
taught a brighter faith and love ? 

Does man ask God to spare his life until morning ? 
Ought man to die in the day time ? 

Does man ask God to fill up the churches with 
converts? Would God make a better preacher than a 
sexton ? 

Does man ask God to drive out the fanaticism from 
the world ? Is God decided in his opinions ? 

As man is finite, he can never know any other than 
a finite God. No other God can be known, because 


INFINITE GOD. 


182 

there is no method by which infinity can be ap¬ 
proached. Man may live a million of years, — the same 
unknown infinity is beyond him, and he must continue 
to impersonate his highest conceptions and call them 
God, if he continues to worship and to believe in his 
name. 

Man in acting, is limited as to results, — to his con¬ 
sciousness. Because results do not always take place as he 
wishes, he has a conception of a being with whom re¬ 
sults may take place as desired. But he should not call 
this conception of a being infinite any more than he 
should call his conception of any being infinite. Man 
is conscious of a limited control, and in speaking of an 
infinite being, the most he can do is to conceive for that 
being a more extended control. Man may build a 
house; consequently, he is led to say of an infinite be¬ 
ing that he created the universe; but he cannot show 
that an infinite being is any more necessary to build the 
universe than to build the house. The construction of 
the universe is to the consciousness of man the same as 
the construction of a house. God builds the universe, 
and man builds the house, because they have motives for 
so doing. To the conception of man, God must com¬ 
mence on the universe in some definite time and locality, 
and in the same way must man commence on the house. 
Consequently, the moment an infinite being does any¬ 
thing that being can not embrace infinity, and the act 
must be the same limited act of which man has a con¬ 
sciousness as pertaining to all beings. Man can not 
prove that a being that is conscious of creating worlds 
does more than one who is only conscious of building a 
house. There are the same infinite relations about the 


GOOD GOD. 


183 


most extended acts of •which man may be conscious as 
about the most limited acts ; and it can not be shown 
that one is nearer infinite than the other, or shows any 
more an infinite author. Man can not embrace in his 
mind the infinity of causes and effects ; consequently, 
his conception of any being or act is limited ; and hence, 
his conception of all beings and acts must be either 
finite or infinite. Every thing is infinite to man in that 
sense that every thing is incomprehensible ; and he can 
not show that he understands any one thing better than 
another. Every thing is finite to man in that sense that 
all beings and acts are limited in their immediate results 
to his consciousness. Man has no conception of any act 
that he can prove to be more or less limited than that 
of another. He can not show that the creating of 
worlds is a less limited action than the building of houses, 
or the raising of the hand. If man means by an infinite 
being, the beings, things, and acts, in all periods of time, 
past and future, it would be an act of selfishness for such 
a being to act ; for he must act without any previous or 
posterior Cause. For any being to act from his love, he 
must be finite; for love presents motives to action in 
given moments of time, and in definite localities. To 
say that God is infinite is the same as saying that God 
is finite. 


ARTICLE XIII. 

THE GOOD GOD. 

Did God tell the world not to take his name in vain ? 
Has God an irritable disposition ? 



184 


GOOD GOD. 


Shall every tongue confess that Christ is Lord to the 
glory of God ? Is God in need of a colleague ? 

Are there some sins that God will not forgive ? 
Can God be so angry that he can not be pacified ? 

Will God call to the people to come and worship 
him ? Will a lioness howl if she lose her young ? 

Does God wish all men to go to heaven ? Does a 
hen dislike to lose one of her chickens ? 

Does God talk to the world that it may be pure ? 
Does God know how to give a sign of distress ? 

Did God send Christ that people might be taken 
from the snares of the devil ? If God should see Satan 
coming would he hide ? 

Does Satan try to call men away from God ? Does 
God ever have bad luck ? 

Does God wish men to feed on heavenly joys ? Will 
sheep do well on hilly ground ? 

Does God wish men to go to heaven to be at rest ? 
Does man give to pigs a new bed of straw ? 

Does God wish to give to man a heavenly mansion ? 
Can God give a warrantee deed ? 

Does God wish man to rest on Sunday? Does God 
like a holiday ? 

Has God told man what things are sacred ? Would 
God be provoked if a Bible was thrown among reptiles ? 

Did God send Christ to be the Savior of men ? Do 
all hear God when he speaks to them ? 

Can man dedicate a house to God. Does God wish 
for mortgages on landed property ? 

Is the Bible a holy book ? Is a dictionary damnable ? 

Is a church a holy place ? Is a swamp a damnable 
locality ? 


GOOD GOD. 


185 


Is a minister consecrated to do God’s work ? Are 
women damnable because they do not preach ? 

Ought men to obey God ? Ought women to obey 
their husbands ? 

Did God create men for his glory ? Are women 
created for mens’ passions ? 

Does every thing glorify God? Can God be de¬ 
graded ? 

Is God the author of all the good ? Do mothers in¬ 
tend to have good children ? 

Did God repent because he made man ? Can chil¬ 
dren weary their parents ? 

Does God wish man to progress towards him ? Did 
God ever tell any one how much he knew? 

Does God wish man to do his will ? Can mothers 
make their children mind ? 

Did Christ come to do God’s will ? Does a robin 
love one of her young better than another ? 

Did God command Moses ? Can dogs drive cattle ? 

Man’s good God is his selfish God ; for in every 
thing that he sees goodness, he sees his God. His God 
can not do different than to act after his likes. There 
are as many good Gods as there are selfish individuals. 
But the selfish loves of one are never the selfish loves 
of another ; therefore, if man says he worships the true 
God, he worships a God that every one else must 
dislike. 

Do man and God hate those who persecute man ? 

Do man and God despise any one ? 

Do man and God love to go to meeting in a costly 
edifice ? 

Do man and God love jewelry ? 


16 * 


186 


UNKNOWN GOD. 


Do man and God despise pagans ? 

Do man and God hate drunkards ? 

Do man and God dislike to be asked for charity ? 

Would man tell God how long he should have been 
in creating the world, — when he should have com¬ 
menced, and when finished ; how he should have spent 
the time on Sunday, whom he should choose for a peo¬ 
ple, and how he should govern them ? 

Would man tell God to what nations he should give 
victories, who ought to rule the world, and who ought 
to be enslaved ? Who should be put in prison, and who 
should be hung ? Does God do every thing man wishes ? 
Does man love God because he is every thing he 
desires ? 

Should man laugh at the foolish, sneer at the igno¬ 
rant, scold at beggars, kill the murderer, punish the 
thief, fine the harlot, expose the gambler, and abhor the 
libertine ? 

Has God and man the same likes and dislikes, and 
also the same opinions ? 


ARTICLE XIV. 

THE UNKNOWN GOD. 

Can man grieve away the Spirit of God ? Can God 
be out of patience ? 

Is God able to save the wicked from hell ? Can God 
hire help ? 

Is it impossible for God to lie ? Can a bird loose its 
wings ? 





UNKNOWN GOD. 


187 


Could God have saved the world if Christ had not died ? 
If a man whips another, will every one love him ? 

Does it grieve God to see sinners going to hell ? Can 
God have an ambassador at the court of Satan ? 

Did God send Paul to preach to the Gentiles ? Can 
God teach man how to dance ? 

Did God send Christ into the world to be his media¬ 
tor ? Can God keep children from crying ? 

Did God tell Moses to exterminate the Canaanites ? 
Does God give to his friends the richest territory ? 

Did God tell Christ that he had great joy in him ? 
Can God laugh ? 

Did God send the prophets into the world ? Is God 
confined at home ? 

Did God permit his son to take on him the sins of the 
world ? Did God expect some one to make him a pres¬ 
ent ? 

Must Christ die in order to satisfy the justice of 
God ? Has God repented of his sins ? 

Can God allow man to choose hell or heaven ? Does 
God and Satan play games for victory ? 

Did God curse the human race through Eve ? If God 
gets in a fury can he get over it ? 

Does God become angry ? Can man pacify God with 
milk ? 

Did God tell the world to fear him and keep his 
commandments ? Does God use firearms ? 

Did God destroy Jerusalem because the Jews killed 
Christ ? Did the Jews gain a victory over God ? 

Does God wish man to worship him ? Is God childish ? 

Does God wish man to praise him ? Has God sins 
to be repented of ? 


188 


SUPERIOR GOD. 


It is selfish to proclaim an unknown God, or to teach 
what he wishes, can, or will do ; because all the informa¬ 
tion man receives of such a being, he must receive from 
authority, or from his own conceptions. There is an 
uncertainty whether every one is informed alike, or 
receives any information from such a being. Hence, to 
teach that any such being is necessary to the joy of man, 
is to make that joy selfish and dependent. 


ARTICLE XY. 

THE SUPERIOR GOD. 

Will Christ sit on the right hand of God? Are 
foxes the most comfortable in their holes ? 

Will the angels call the elect from all parts of the 
universe ? How far can a dinner horn be heard ? 

Did God send Christ to die for the world ? Could 
not Christ’s burden have been distributed ? 

Would God only permit Christ to die for the world ? 
Will God ever be born again ? 

Does God wish all men to go to heaven ? Can God 
be cured of selfish desires ? 

Does God wish to give men a house not made with 
hands ? Can God learn to see joy in the present 
moments of existence ? 

Does man prefer heaven to hell ? If a ball is thrown 
into the air will it come down ? 

Can a man prefer hell to heaven ? On what kind of 
soil ought trees to grow ? 



SUPERIOR GOD . 


189 


Will man shout the praises of God in heaven ? Will 
dogs be allowed in the New Jerusalem ? 

Man, in personifying or attaching any importance to 
a being he calls God, learns to leave the actualities of 
life that should claim his attention. A superior God, 
becomes a being whose favor should be purchased, 
who controls the happiness and misery of men now 
and in the future through his likes and dislikes. Every 
God that man personifies, controls and directs him in a 
selfish channel ; because all conceptions that he can 
have of God, are finite and dependent; and hence, 
making those conceptions a dependent and selfish joy. 
Man, in a selfish condition, must have likes and dislikes ; 
and his God must be of the same opinion as himself, 
and therefore a selfish God. Man that is free from 
selfishness, can not personify his finite conceptions and 
call them God, for the act is an act of selfishness. Man 
can have no God without supposing a finite God; and 
with that finite God he must presume to favoritism, —- 
that there is something to be lost and gained. Man can 
never be free until he learns that there is no being 
superior or inferior to himself, and also learns that it is 
impossible to loose or gain any thing. Man may be 
able to create and destroy worlds to his consciousness, but 
he can not prove that he is more the cause of any thing 
than the fall of a grain of sand. In seeing a God, man 
is led away from the changes in the present moments of 
existence to anticipate future conditions and pleasures 
to suit his present selfish feelings. Man’s consciousness 
of existence is only in the present moment ; and unless 
he is striving in the present moment to be free, he never 
can be so ; and to anticipate that he shall be free in the 




190 SUPERIOR GOD. 

future, is only to give to him an eternity of anticipa¬ 
tion ; for he is never any nearer freedom by anticipating 
that it will come to him in some future moment. But 
his superior God leads him to suppose that by some 
action on his part, he will ^give him the conditions of 
his love. 

Man is where his faith leads him in every moment of 
time ; if man has faith in the joy of the free, he is free 
and not dependent. If this faith is dependent, man can 
never be free ; but man’s faith is dependent the moment 
he has a superior God ; for to acknowledge a superior 
God, is to acknowledge an inferior condition, and to 
acknowledge an inferior condition is to acknowledge a 
conception of a condition that is better ; and man must 
be led, instead of seeking to see joy in the condition of 
the present moment, to see joy in the future better 
condition. 

What man has faith in may be a dependent joy ; but 
faith in love is not dependent, for it will give joy inde¬ 
pendent of conditions and circumstances. But man can 
not love independent of conditions and circumstances, 
if he has any thing superior or inferior to himself; for 
whatever is superior must be so through conditions, and 
those conditions must be objects of a selfish attachment. 
Superior conditions are known to man through his sel¬ 
fishness ; he can not say love creates them, for love 
overcomes them. 

Every thing that man exalts or degrades, he removes 
from his love by making it an object of selfish attach¬ 
ment or fear. Man can selfishly love or prefer a being 
that he exalts ; but his selfish love is dependent on the 
conditions that make the being superior. If the con- 


SUPERIO R GOD. 


191 


ditions are destroyed on which this selfish love depends, 
the man who thus loves becomes what the world calls a 
traitor, while in reality has only been demolished one of 
his anticipated joys. Therefore, for man to impersonate 
any of his conceptions and call them God, or to call any 
being superior to himself, is an act of selfishness. 

It was selfish in God to give to Moses the Decalogue 
at Sinai. It is selfish in any one to teach that God gave 
to Moses the Decalogue at Sinai. 

It was selfish in God to stop the sun that Joshua 
might complete his victory. It is selfish in any one to 
teach that God stopped the sun that Joshua might com¬ 
plete his victory. 

It was selfish in God to contend through Moses 
against the Egyptian magicians, — to see who should per¬ 
form the greatest wonders. It is selfish to teach that 
God contended through Moses against the Egyptian 
magicians,—to see who should perform the greatest 
wonders. 

It was selfish in God to reveal himself to Moses 
through a burning bush. It is selfish to teach that 
God revealed himself to Moses through a burning 
bush. 

It was selfish in God to send Jesus Christ into the 
world as a superior being. It is selfish to teach that 
God sent Jesus Christ into the world as a superior 
being. 

Every revelation that God has made of himself as a 
superior being, is an act of selfishness. It is selfish in any 
one to teach that God has ever revealed himself as a 
superior being. 

It was selfish in Christ to say that the righteous 


198 


SUPERIOR GOB. 


should enter into life eternal, and the wicked into ever¬ 
lasting punishment. It is selfish to teach that Christ 
said these things. 

It was selfish in God to swear by Himself, because 
he could s~wear by none greater. It is selfish to teach 
that God ever swore by Himself. 

It was selfish in Christ to say that blasphemy against 
the Holy Ghost should not be forgiven. It is selfish to 
teach that Christ said that blasphemy against the Holy 
Ghost should not be forgiven. 

It was selfish in God to say that justice required that 
any person should be punished. It is selfish to teach 
that God said that any person should be punished. 

It was selfish in God to reveal himself, and say 
there was no other God. It is selfish to teach that God 
did reveal himself, and said that there was no other God. 

It was selfish in God to prefer the Jewish nation in 
preference to any other. It is selfish to teach that God 
preferred the Jewish nation in preference to any other. 

It was selfish in God to say that Jesus Christ was any 
more his son than any one else. It is selfish to teach 
that God said that Jesus Christ was any more His son 
than any one else. 

It was selfish in Christ to say that he knew more of 
God than any one else. It is selfish to teach that Christ 
said that he knew more of God than any one else. 

It was selfish in God to ask that all honor and glory 
should be given to him. It is selfish to teach that God 
claimed all honor and glory. 

It was selfish in God to tell the world not to take his 
name in vain. It is selfish to teach that God told the 
world not to take his name in vain. 


SUPERIOR GOD. 


193 


It was selfish in God to ask the world to worship him. It 
is selfish to teach that God asked the world to worship him. 

It was selfish in God to ask men to pray to him for 
gifts. It is selfish to teach that God asked men to pray 
to him for gifts. 

It was selfish in God to ask men to be thankful to 
him for any thing. It is selfish to teach that God asked 
men to be thankful to him for any thing. 

It was selfish in God to reveal himself as three Gods. It 
is selfish to teach that God revealed himself as three Gods. 

It was selfish in God to drive Adam and Eve from 
Eden. It is selfish to teach that God drove Adam and 
Eve from Eden. 

It was selfish in God to try the faith of Abraham. It 
is selfish to teach that God tried the faith of Abraham. 

It is selfish in God to tell the world that he likes 
religious revivals. It is selfish to teach that God likes 
religious revivals. 

It was selfish in God to tell the world that those who 
do not worship him shall be damned. It is selfish to 
teach that God said that those who do not worship him 
shall be damned. 

It was selfish in Christ to tell the people to lay up 
treasure in heaven. It is selfish to teach that Christ 
told the people to lay up treasure in heaven. 

It was selfish in Christ to weep over Jerusalem, and 
at the grave of Lazarus. It is selfish to teach that Christ 
wept over Jerusalem, and at the grave of Lazarus. 

It was selfish in God to repent that he had made man. 
It is selfish to teach that God repented, because he 
had made man. 

It was selfish in God to destroy the world by a flood 


17 


194 


SUPERIOR GOD. 


because of evil. It is selfish to teach that Gocl destroyed 
the world by a flood because of evil. 

It was selfish in God to tell the Jews that they were 
Ms chosen people. It is selfish to teach that God told 
the Jews that they were his chosen people. 

It was selfish in God to destroy the Egyptians in the 
Red Sea because they were pursuing the Israelites. It 
is selfish to teach that God destroyed the Egyptians in 
the Red Sea because they were pursuing the Israelites. 

It was selfish in Christ to teach his followers how to 
pray. It is selfish to teach that Christ taught his follow¬ 
ers how to pray. 

It was selfish in Christ to pray to God in the garden 
of Gethsemane. It is selfish to teach that Christ prayed 
to God in the garden of Gethsemane. 

It was selfish in Christ to love John more than the 
other disciples. It is selfish to teach that Christ loved 
John more than the other disciples. 

It was selfish in Christ to ride into Jerusalem on an 
ass colt to verify a prophecy. It is selfish to teach that 
Christ rode into, Jerusalem on an ass colt to verify a 
prophecy. 

It was selfish in Christ to direct his disciples how they 
should behave on a journey. It is selfish to teach that 
Christ directed his disciples how they should behave on 
a journey. 

It was selfish in Christ to call the Scribes and Phara- 
sees hypocrites. It is selfish to teach that Christ called 
the Scribes and Pharasees hypocrites. 

It was selfish in Christ to destroy a tree because it 
bore no fruit. It is selfish to teach that Christ destroyed 
a tree because it bore no fruit. 


SUPERIOR GOD. 


195 


It was selfish in Christ to tell the people to love God. 
It is selfish to teach that Christ told the people to love 
God. 

It was selfish in Christ to accuse the Jews of having 
persecuted the prophets. It is selfish to teach that 
Christ accused the Jews of having persecuted the 
prophets. 

It was selfish in Christ to suppose that he was a supe¬ 
rior being. It is selfish to teach that Christ supposed 
that he was a superior being. 

It was selfish in God to intimate that he was the 
Supreme Ruler of the universe. It is selfish to teach 
that God intimated that he was the Supreme Ruler of 
the universe. 

It was selfish in Christ to intimate that his followers 
should have a house not made with hands. It is selfish 
to teach that Christ intimated that his followers should 
have a house not made with hands. 

It was selfish in Christ to say that his followers should 
be rewarded here and in the future world. It is selfish 
to teach that Christ said that his followers should be 
rewarded here and in the future world. 

It was selfish in Christ to say that all who believed on 
him should have everlasting life. It is selfish to teach 
that Christ said that all who believed on him should 
have everlasting life. 

It was selfish in Christ to tell others to do any thing 
in his name. It is selfish to teach that Christ told others 
to do any thing in his name. 

It was selfish in Christ to do any miracle and give 
the credit to God. It is selfish to teach that Christ done 
any miracle and gave the credit to God. 


196 


GOD OF MERCY. 


It was selfish in Christ to intimate that the Holy 
Ghost was a superior influence. It is selfish to teach 
that Christ intimated that the Holy Ghost was a superior 
influence. 

It was selfish in Emanuel Swedenborg to suppose that 
he was an instrument to do the will of God more than 
any one else. It is selfish to teach that Emanuel 
Swedenborg supposed he was an instrument to do the 
will of God more than any one else. 

It is selfish in any one to suppose that he is more 
appointed to do the work of God than any one else. It 
is selfish to teach that any one is more appointed to do 
the work of God than any one else. 

It is selfish in God, angels, odd force, the ancient dead, 
men, or devils, in the heavens or on the earth, to sup¬ 
pose that they are superior or inferior to others. It is 
selfish to teach that God, angels, odd force, the ancient 
dead, men, or devils, in the heavens or on the earth, are 
superior or inferior to others. 


ARTICLE XVI. 

THE GOD OF MERCY. 

Was God’s mercy shown in sending Christ into the 
world? Was God’s wrath shown when Christ was on 
the cross ? 

Was God’s mercy shown in the conversion of Paul ? 
Was God’s wrath shown when Paul was stoned ? 

Is God’s mercy shown when a man’s conception of 



GOD OF MERCY. 


197 


truth spreads ? Is God’s wrath shown when one’s con¬ 
ception of error is believed ? 

Is God’s mercy shown when a man becomes rich? 
Is God’s wrath shown when a man becomes poor ? 

Is God’s mercy shown when one is converted to 
Christ ? Is God’s wrath shown when one calls Christ 
an impostor ? 

Is God’s mercy shown in relieving the oppressed ? Is 
God’s wrath shown when slaves carry more burdens ? 

Is God’s mercy shown in relieving some sufferers by 
death ? Is God’s wrath shown when man is in trouble ? 

Is God’s mercy shown in giving to the world the 
Bible ? Is God’s wrath shown when the Bible is 
burned ? 

Is it God’s mercy that enables man to live ? Is it 
God’s wrath that causes man to die ? 

Is it God’s mercy that enables the poor to be fed ? Is 
it God’s wrath that causes the poor to starve ? 

Is it God’s mercy that enables children to become 
respectable ? Is it God’s wrath that causes children to 
become murderers ? 

Is it God’s mercy that saves life at sea ? Is it God’s 
wrath that drowns men ? 

Shall man say that one of the events of life manifest 
more love than another ? Who shall judge, and say 
what is the cause of his grief or joy ? Man should 
strive for faith in the changes and events of life, that he 
may see love manifested in everything. 


17* 




198 GOD OF ACTION. 

ARTICLE X Y II. 

THE GOD OF ACTION. 

Did God make heaven ? Did Satan make hell ? 

Did God create all that man calls good ? Did Satan 
create all that man calls evil ? 

Did God send Christ into the world? Did Satan 
send Judas Iscariot into the world ? 

Did God cause the Bible to be written ? Did Satan 
cause the Koran to be written ? 

Does God try to have people good ? Does Satan try 
to have people evil ? 

Did God make the world ? Did nature produce the 
trees ? 

Does God make man ? Does nature bring forward the 
harvest ? 

Does God take man from the earth ? Do frosts kill 
the grass in autumn ? 

Is the action of God merciful ? Is the action of Satan 
damnable ? 

Does man build a house ? Do cattle eat hay ? 

Does man build a church ? Does Satan build bar¬ 
rooms ? 

Does God manifest himself in churches ? Does Satan 
manifest himself at the theatre ? 

Does God want a revival occasionally ? Does the 
devil prefer lively music ? 

Did God teach man how to cultivate the earth ? Did 
the devil teach man how to make shoes ? 

Is Satan fighting against God ? Is God fighting 
against Satan ? 


JUDGING GOD. 


199 


Does God and man fight against Satan ? Does Satan 
and man fight against God ? 

Did God drive Satan from heaven ? Did Satan drive 
God from hell ? 

Man can never know the real cause of any action, for 
every thing is infinite in its connections ; and consequent¬ 
ly, the causes and effects of everything exist in all periods 
of time. When one says that God, man, the devil, or 
nature acts, he refers to an effect, the cause of which 
exists in one period as much as in another. Therefore, 
if it can be said that one thing is not the action of infin¬ 
ity, it can be said that all things are not the action of: 
infinity. 


ARTICLE XVIII. 

THE JUDGING GOD. 

Must all appear before Christ to be judged ? Can 
Christ put a man in jail ? 

Ought the man who murders his brother be hung ? 
If the man does not like his child, will he give it to 
the poor master ? 

Ought the man who steals be put in prison ? If a 
horse gets into a garden, will man keep it in the stable 
during life l 

Must children be whipped ? Will God whip chil¬ 
dren eternally ? 

Must women be denied from owning property ? Will 
God permit women to live, if unable to work ? 



200 


JUDGING GOD. 


Ought women be allowed to vote ? Will God allow 
women to wash clothes ? 

Ought the rich to give their money to the poor ? 
Ought horses to be fed on oats ? 

Ought women to obey their husbands ? Ought dogs 
to mind their masters ? 

Ought women to be allowed in political meetings ? 
Ought cats to be allowed to look at robins ? 

Ought women to speak in public assemblies ? Ought 
horses to be allowed to neigh ? 

Ought the wicked world to be sent to hell ? Ought 
snakes to go to heaven ? 

Can the blasphemer be forgiven l Can God save his 
reputation ? 

Ought the Bible to be read by every one ? Ought 
God to set down on the mountain ? 

Ought man to preach Christ l Ought Christ to wear 
a coat without a seam ? 

Ought Christ to have been crucified to save sinners ? 
Ought Nebuchadnezzar to have fed on the grass ? 

Did God send Christ that the world might be saved ? 
Did God tell Jephtha to sacrifice his daughter ? 

Ought God to burn hypocrites ? Ought God to give 
to harlots the first seats in heaven ? 

Will God take man to heaven if he repent before 
dying ? Will man give to dogs milk if they churn 
cream ? 

After death will man go into the presence of God ? 
Will a man give one hen corn if it lay more eggs than 
another ? 

Any judging, with reference to awarding rewards or 
punishment, merit or demerit, is selfish. 


JUDGING GOD . 


201 


Every one acts through, faith, and consequently, none 
can help doing those things in which they see their joy ; 
therefore, one man should not judge another. If a man 
murders or cheats, he does so through faith, believing it to 
be joy. In this way all beings act. If a man steals, it 
is because he has faith there is more joy in obtaining 
things without paying for them ; if he cheats, he has 
faith that the extra gain will give him more joy than to 
deal honestly. 

Man can not be more to blame for any one act of 
life than another ; for every act is alike an act of faith. 
Man can not be said to be more to blame in those instan¬ 
ces where he violates his conscience, than when he does 
not ; for he must do at all times what he sees to be his 
joy. The faith of another should not be judged ; for no 
one can judge another, except through motives of sel¬ 
fishness. Man may, in one condition of life, think it his 
joy to take the property of others, and in another, think 
it best to give away his property as soon as possible, and 
he is not more to blame for one faith than for the other; 
for after his faith he must act. 

Man should act from his love ; and if he would make 
the thief better, he must give to him a better faith. As 
soon as the thief learns that his conduct prevents joy, 
he ceases to steal; and any thing that is done to him 
that has no reference to this object, is an act of sel¬ 
fishness. Man, instead of judging the thief, should be¬ 
come his teacher. No one is made better, except 
through faith in love. The thief can not steal in prison, 
and he may not steal through fear, if punished, when 
out of prison ; but he is never better until he has a 
better faith, and this faith must come through love. 


JUDGING GOD. 


202 

Man should not say that the one who drinks to his 
injury should be punished ; for every act of punishment 
is selfish, because it supposes that an unnecessary act 
has taken place, which can not be proved. The one who 
drinks or steals, is in want of a new love ; if he is pun¬ 
ished, he may be more selfish. Man ought not to 
judge and punish another for the want of love; for it 
can not be bought or sold, and can only come through 
faith that it brings joy. Man should adopt the' thief 
and drunkard as his brothers, and nothing that they 
can do should impair his love for them. 

Man has no more reason to be vexed if he trusts his 
neighbor with money and he squanders it, than if it was 
returned to him two fold. His neighbor could not do 
different with the money than what his faith led him ; 
if he is vexed, it is in consequence of the selfish con¬ 
sideration of the loss sustained. It was faith that caused 
him to give the money into the hands of his neighbor, 
and faith that caused his neighbor to spend it. The 
faith of all can not be alike ; and when it is supposed 
that one should do as another would have him, or is 
punishable, it is supposed that all can have the same 
faith, which is impossible. The man that has squan¬ 
dered the money of another, is not punishable, although 
he might have violated the known laws of society, and 
his own conscience. He had faith in spending the 
money against the laws of society and his conscience, as 
being joy. Therefore, there can not be attached any 
more blame to one act of a man’s life than to another ; 
for all are led by faith, and every act of judging arises 
from selfishness. 

Man should not judge society and say that it is wrong, 


JUDGING GOD. 


203 


and that new rules and regulations should he adopted. 
If the individuals composing society are selfish, society 
is selfish and will remain so, although it may adopt any 
new rules or regulations. That the few cheat the many 
is of no consequence, except through selfishness ; and 
if there are the few rich and the many poor, it does not 
assume any importance only to the selfish. If a man 
should beg and be scorned, it would be of no conse¬ 
quence, except through pride. Man should not judge 
society to be wrong because he is poor, cheated, or 
begging; and if any of these conditions annoy him, it 
is a good time to seek that he may be free from selfish¬ 
ness. 

Man should not judge trade, and say it is con¬ 
ducted wrong, or that any one method of doing business 
is superior to another. Will it be said, the poor 
should be protected from the oppressions of the rich ? 
A new condition for any class of people should not be 
sought for as of any consequence in itself. In itself it 
is of no consequence whether any one is poor or rich, — 
pays for an article half or double its value. Man can do 
for another in any way that he can invite him to love; 
but to seek to make the poor rich is inviting them to 
acts of selfishness. If man labors for the outward con¬ 
dition of the poor, thinking it of consequence, he is 
laboring and inviting others to labor for a selfish inter¬ 
est ; for one condition in life is not superior to another. 
Will it be said that articles ought to go directly from 
the producer to the consumer, that the poor may obtain 
their goods cheaper ? This desire originates in the 
same selfishness as the desire to be rich. It is selfish¬ 
ness to seek to take from one class in community, and 


204 


JUDGING GOD. 


give to another ; and whoever is doing this, is inviting 
one class selfishly to retain their money, and another 
selfishly to grasp it. It is as selfish to seek to obtain 
goods at a cheaper rate, as it is selfish to retain them for 
higher prices. It is as selfish to seek preferences for 
the poor, as to seek them for the rich. It is of no con¬ 
sequence whether an article comes through one or many 
hands before it reaches the consumer, because the con¬ 
ditions of life are of no importance ; it is only important 
that man should be faithful in whatever condition 
placed, for he is always in that condition best for him¬ 
self and all beings. 

Man should not seek to give advice to others, think¬ 
ing it of importance, respecting their outward condition. 
If what man shall do with reference to the affairs of life 
assumes any importance to his mind, it is through 
selfishness. 

In whatever condition man is placed in society, whe¬ 
ther among the rich, beggars, or thieves, he has all the 
happiness his faith can give him. When one condition 
is supposed to be superior to another, it is so through a 
selfish attachment; therefore, man should not judge over 
the various conditions of society, and say that one is the 
best, and seek to give it to all. Whoever loves the rich 
will not seek to take any thing from them, but to give to 
them a new faith ; and if they shall obtain a new faith 
and love, through the adverse influences of their con¬ 
dition, it was the appointed condition for them to obtain 
it. If the poor shall love amidst the adverse influences 
of their condition, it is through the same appointment. 
All the conditions of life are appointed, and man should 
seek to love in all. 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


205 


A man in judging, must judge through his selfish 
loves. If he thinks riches of importance, it becomes a 
point to judge from ; and if he loves his friend, he will 
strive to make him rich; if he loves the poor, he will 
strive to make them rich ; and all impediments that would 
conflict with this desire he would judge to be wrong. 
In the same way, if he desires fame, it becomes a point 
through which he must judge of truth and duty. 

If man loves one being more than another, he cannot 
judge; the love of all beings must be limited, therefore, 
no being should judge. 

Man should not judge, but seek to give a new faith to 
all by his love, and be satisfied with every thing that 
takes place; for he can not attach any blame anywhere. 

Man should not judge himself to others; for by so 
doing he invites others to judge him ; besides, he must 
be actuated by some selfishness. 

Man should seek to judge of his selfish motives 
through life, that he may have strength to love all 
beings. 


ARTICLE XIX. 

THE GOD OF AUTHORITY. 

Did Christ say that a man that does not believe shall 
be damned ? Can a tree fall out of the universe ? 

Did Christ say that the righteous should go into life 
eternal ? Can a stream of water become more exclusive 
the nearer it approaches the sea ? 

Does the Bible say that the wicked are turned into 

IS 



206 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


hell ? Ought the cleanings of the street to make corn 
grow ? 

Does the Bible say a man’s sins shall be covered ? 
Ought plants to be set in the shade ? 

Does the Bible say that Solomon was the wisest 
man ? Does the Koran say that Mohammed was a true 
prophet ? 

Does God wish men to do different ? Ought God to 
worry about the affairs of life ? 

Does God wish to save men from their sins ? Ought 
God to interfere with the affairs of life ? 

Is Jesus Christ God ? Ought cats to be worshipped ? 

Are there three Gods ? How many wives ought 
Solomon to have had ? 

Did God think it necessary to have Christ crucified ? 
If God should read the Bible would he be faithful ? 

Does the Holy Spirit importune men to seek Christ ? 
Will galvanism convulse a dead animal ? 

Does Christ sit on the right hand of God ? Are 
banners placed at the head of processions ? 

Is God a spirit ? Is fire material ? 

Was Paul on the earth St. Paul? Is Paul in the 
future world the spirit of St. Paul ? 

Do the famous dead tell what is truth? Do the 
unknown dead travel to find truth ? 

Does a preacher know what is heresy ? Can a 
preacher be thrown out of a carriage ? 

Does the Bible tell what is heresy ? Ought man to 
go into a hole in summer to warm himself? 

Will God damn infants ? Will a tigress eat her young ? 

Will God damn the wicked ? Can the church pray 
for God’s repentance ? 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


207 


Will God cause the wicked to weep ? Can God be 
converted and join the church ? 

Will God cause the worms to feed on the wicked ? 
Can God be sent to hell ? 

Will God refuse to pardon men after death ? Ought 
God to be chained for a thousand years ? 

Does God wish men to ask his forgiveness ? Does 
God want marble to build him a house ? 

Will the pure find a heavenly mansion after death ? 
Can a heavenly mansion be built with logs ? 

Are heavenly mansions made without hands ? Do 
heavenly mansions grow from seed ? 

Does God despise the blasphemer ? Can God be 
comfortable with opiates ? 

Did God make a tender of his mercy to the world ? 
Does God get into trouble wherever he goes ? 

If a man is baptized will God have mercy? Can 
God be cured of selfish preferences ? 

If a man conforms to nature will he live in harmony ? 
If a man finds a new resting place will he have better 
thoughts ? 

Does nature tell man not to eat pork ? Does nature 
tell man not to ride in the cars ? 

Does nature tell man to sleep on his back ? Does 
nature tell a horse to sleep standing ? 

Does nature teach to man the Golden Rule ? Does 
nature tell man to do without beef in the desert ? 

Does nature tell man to live without meat ? Does 
nature tell man to use leather for shoes ? 

Does nature tell man to love his neighbor ? Does 
a shovel tell man he should work ? 






208 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


Does God want men to feel dependent on him ? 
Will a barrel hold without iron hoops ? 

Does a professor know what is truth ? Will water 
be purer the deeper it is found in the earth ? 

Does a governor know what is truth ? When a rope 
is long has it the more strength ? 

Does a rich man know what is truth ? Can a man 
travel best with an overcoat ? 

Does a doctor of divinity know what is truth ? If a 
peacock would spread its feathers can it run ? 

Does a college know what is truth ? Does it take a 
coil of rope to hang a man ? 

Does a theological seminary know what is truth ? 
How much more strength is required to break a bundle 
of sticks than one ? 

Does a secret society know what is truth ? Will seed 
grow better the deeper it is planted in the earth ? 

Does an orator know what is truth! Is a chain 
stronger on account of the quantity of links ? 

Does a famous man know what is truth ? Is a rope 
better on account of the quantity of knots ? 

Does a man that talks with the dead know what is 
truth ? Can a man hear better if he goes into the forest ? 

Do those who read books know what is truth ? Will 
a man be free if he has a library ? 

Do departed beings know what is truth ? Will a 
storm take man from his passions ? 

If a man dies does he sleep in Jesus ? Can man 
catch a football every time it comes down ? 

Is immortality an anchor to the soul ? Are children 
to the poor desirable ? 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


209 


Shall mourners be comforted because Christ rose 
from the deryd ? When idiots die ought they to have a 
heavenly mansion ? 

Ought God to be thanked because he has brought 
immortality to light ? Ought God to be cursed if the 
future world is no better than this ? 

Ought men to pray to God? Is God in need of 
ministers ? 

Does God love the man that praises his name ? Do 
sheep give signs of pleasure when fed with salt ? 

Does God love the man that cries for mercy ? Do 
men love beggars ? 

Does God love the man that shouts glory ? Do men 
like to hear the cries of the distressed ? 

Does God love the man that goes to church ? Are 
pictures in churches holy ? 

Did God say he would not forgive the blasphemer 
against the Holy Ghost in this world, or in the world to 
come ? Will an angel flog a blasphemer through 
eternity ? 

Will God give the blasphemer into the hands of the 
devil ? Will the devil do every thing God wishes him ? 

Can the Holy Ghost, God, and Christ, make one God ? 
Can three men sleep well on the same couch ? 

Should the Holy Ghost receive praise ? Can the 
Holy Ghost appreciate favors ? 

Is man naturally averse to God ? Do crows like the 
noise of fire-arms ? 

Is Jesus Christ the Son of God ? * Is the Holy 
Ghost the wife of God ? 

Does God cause the rain to fall on the evil and on the 
good ? Does it rain at the residence of the devil ? 


18 * 


210 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


Does God cause the sun to shine on the pure and the 
degraded ? Is there any light at the dwelling of a 
blasphemer ? 

Ought ministers to shake the dust from their feet as 
a testimony against them that do not believe ? If man 
stands in a clean place is God better pleased ? 

It is as selfish to refer to God, great men, nature, or 
the Bible, as authority to have men do any thing, as it is 
to appeal to any mercenary interest. To be free, men 
must act from love. 

There is no means of proving that one kind of author¬ 
ity is superior to that of another. Whoever believes in 
a being superior to himself, must act from authority; 
because the superior can say to the inferior being, what 
he. should adopt as truth. Man may say that he will 
accept no authority but that of God. But the God 
whom he concludes to accept as authority, is a being of 
his own creation, and is never the same being to him in 
any two moments of time. He can not show that this 
God, whom he concludes to follow, is any better than any 
one else. But if man would act from God as authority, 
in one instance, he should act from God as authority in 
all instances. But in making this endeavor, he presents 
a temptation to all who wish to exert any selfish control 
over him, to say that God wishes him to adopt certain 
truths, instead of presenting them to be adopted from 
his own conceptions. If man acknowdedges a God, he 
must acknowledge authority ; and he can not show that 
his authority is superior to that of any ecclesiastical rule 
ever established. If man acknowledges a God, he must 
suppose that God to speak to him in a definite manner ; 
for to say that God speaks to him in a general manner. 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


211 


is the same as saying there is no God; for to say that 
every thing that takes place is the action of God, is the 
same as saying that nothing is the action of God ; to say 
that God causes the infinity of action everywhere, is the 
same as saying that God does not cause it ; for God must 
be an exception to that action, which makes infinite 
action an impossibility. Man may say he will act from 
God after the general manifestation he is pleased to make 
in all action that comes to his notice; but in saying this, 
he destroys his God ; for he can not show that the action 
that comes to his notice, is any more from one than an 
infinity of Gods. There is no means by which man can 
acknowledge God as authority, except to acknowledge 
that God can speak to him in some definite manner ; 
and when he acknowledges this, he can not prove that 
the authority of God is superior to any other authority 
ever known. Peter in accepting the authority of God 
instead of that of men, had only changed his selfish 
feelings. He supposed that God had spoken to him in a 
definite manner through Christ. Man has no means of 
knowing any thing of God, unless God can speak to him 
in some definite manner; hence, to acknowdedge the 
existence of God is to acknowledge an authority which 
there is no means of proving to be superior or inferior 
to any authority ever exercised, except through selfish 
preferences. 

To act from authority is to act without perceiving the 
action to be one of love. The motive of selfishness is 
the same, whether man acts from the opinions of others, 
without perceiving them to be acts of love, as when 
he acts for any selfish end. If man does not perceive 
the opinion of another to be one of love, he can not 


212 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


accept it unless he supposes the being to be superior to 
himself; and he can not do any thing because another 
bids him do it, if he does not see it as an act of love, 
except he believes the being superior, or except some 
selfish interest is addressed. Whoever is not free, acts 
from authority. Whoever acknowledges a superior 
intelligence to himself, must act from authority. Man 
may find that he is misled in acting from authority in 
one instance, and suppose by rejecting that, he rejects all 
authority. But as long as he is in a selfish condition, he 
rejects one authority that he may adopt a new selfish 
love. The man who rejects the Koran as authority, and 
accepts the Bible, is in the same selfish condition. He 
who rejects the Bible for the teachings of the dead, he 
who rejects the authority of men to accept that of God, 
is in the same selfish condition. Man should not say 
that authority from one source is better than that from 
another; he should not say that superior intelligences 
in the future world are better authority than the Bible ; 
because authority from any source is selfish, and there 
is no proving that selfishness in one instance is better 
than selfishness in another. God or Christ may tell man 
to conform to the Golden Buie; and in all instances 
when he conforms to it as an act of love, he does not act 
from authority ; but when he conforms to it and does 
not act from his love, he acts from authority. If man 
strikes a child because the Bible tells him not to spare 
the rod, he acts from the same authority as the woman 
who throws her child into the river to satisfy her God. 
The authority is as good in one instance as in the other. 

Whoever believes that there can be any such person 
as a great man, must act from authority ; because there 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


ns 


must be some revered standard in his mind by which he 
discovers a man to be great. That standard is a selfish 
love; and whoever conforms to it to his conception, is 
likely to receive his preferences. Man may be led to 
suppose because a preacher spends a number of years in 
educating himself, that he has a superior education, and 
that his opinions respecting what is truth should be 
valid. But no one can give his opinion to another as an 
act of love, except he is free from selfish attachments. 
If a preacher feels dependent on a society for his salary ; 
if he feels dependent on any organized body of men for 
his respectable standing ; if he feels that he has a superior 
education to any one else, he has a selfish attachment 
that must prevent him from giving his opinion as an act 
of love. Man does not often acknowledge the force of 
any reasoning that conflicts with selfish attachments, for 
he is likely to adopt his selfish attachments as standards 
to reason from. The condition of the pastor and peo¬ 
ple,—the shepherd and his flock, is considered a good 
standard to reason from ; consequently, anything that 
would interfere with this condition the pastor would be 
likely to decide to be erroneous. But, although man 
may give his opinion as an act of love, that opinion must 
be received on authority, except it is perceived to be an 
opinion of love. Hence, man may give his opinion as 
an act of selfishness and as an act of love, and both 
opinions be acted upon from love and from selfishness. 

It is selfish in man to receive any thing as truth, be¬ 
cause God, Christ, or the angels tell him it is truth. 

It is selfish in man to do any thing on account of 
any command from God, Christ, or the angels. 


214 


GOD OF AUTHORITY. 


It was selfish in Jesus Christ to do any thing because 
God so wished. 

It was selfish in the disciples of Jesus Christ to do 
anything because he so commanded them. 

It is selfish in man to receive any thing as truth be¬ 
cause the dead say it is truth. 

It is selfish in man to do any thing because the dead 
tell him to do it. 

It is selfish to teach that communications can be re¬ 
ceived from “superior intelligences/’ “angels/’ “the 
honored dead.” 

It is selfish in man to seek to be a leader in any sect, 
party, people, or organization. 

It is selfish in man to acknowledge any one as his 
leader or guide. 

It is selfish in man to acknowledge any book or 
writings as his guide. 

It is selfish in man to accept any thing as truth be¬ 
cause it is universally accepted as such, or because any 
being in the universe, living or dead, learned or igno¬ 
rant, angelic or degraded, honored or unhonored, says 
that it is truth. 

It was selfish in Moses to dispossess the Canaanites 
because God so commanded. 

It is selfish in the world to be governed by God be¬ 
cause God wishes to govern the world. 

It is selfish in the angels and the dead to be controlled 
by God because God wishes to control them. 

It was selfish in the Jews to perform any ceremonies or 
sacrifices of burnt offerings to God because God 
expressed himself pleased with them. 


GOD OF THE COST. 215 

It was selfish in David and Solomon to build the 
temple in order to please God. 

It was selfish in the Bible prophets to do any thing 
because God commanded them. 

It was selfish in God to reveal himself as the author 
of all things in the heavens and on the earth. 

It is selfish to teach that God is the author of all 
things in the heavens or on the earth. 

It is selfish in man to rest or to abstain from labor on 
Sunday because God done the same. 


ARTICLE XX. 

THE GOD OF THE COST. 

Do men manifest love to God by a certain amount ot 
money for preaching, for a new organ, and for repairing 
church, — a certain amount of time spent in prayer, 
in meeting, and in reading the Bible ? How much is 
man’s love to God worth ? 

Will man worship God that he may be saved from 
hell, sins, suffering, sorrow, distress, the devil, or the 
second death ? Can man hire out to God by the year ? 

Would man like to go to heaven because he has heard 
there is no sorrow there ? Would man like to live in 
the palaces of kings ? 

To see the angels would man ask a blessing at every 
meal, and say prayers every day ? If man could see 
angels, would he be willing to wash clothes ? 



£16 


GOD OF THE COST. 


Will man praise God that he may have mercy on 
him ? Is God ready for a bargain ? 

Would man pray that he may not suffer the conse- 
sequences of his wrongs ? If man will build a church, 
will God forgive him ? 

Does it give man trouble to refrain from doing evil ? 
Can man trade with God, and keep in the narrow way ? 

Does man feel that God has saved him ? Can man 
buy the salvation of his brothers and sisters ? 

Will it cost a certain amount of money to build and 
dedicate a church to God ? What is the value of God’s 
respectability ? 

Will joining a church save man from hell ? How 
much service does God require to prevent him from 
hurting man ? 

Would man leave his present toil to find the angels ? 
Would man pray all night on the mountain if God 
would make him free ? 

Would man go to heaven to be free from care ? How 
much would man pay to find ease ? 

Is man waiting until he goes to heaven, that God may 
reconcile him to enemies ? How much does it cost to 
buy a heavenly mansion ? 

Does man pray for prosperity ? Is God afraid of poverty ? 

Would man praise God because he was comfortable ? 
Is God selfish ? 

Would man pray to marry into a rich family ? Does 
God desire wealth ? 

Would man pray for distinction? Is God better 
pleased with some than others ? 

Would man pray that truth might spread as he be¬ 
lieved it ? What would man pay to have followers ? 


GOD OF THE COST. 


217 


Has God confounded a man’s enemies ? For whom 
do the free labor ? 

How much does it cost to support public worship ? 
How much does it cost to support a president ? 

Will the man that does not pay to support preaching go 
to hell ? If a man does not pay court charges will he 
be put in prison ? 

Would a man like to preach over a rich society? 
Are the feathers of a peacock better than those of a crow ? 

How much does it cost to print the Bible ? What 
kind of investment pays best for money ? 

How much does it cost to send God’s word to the 
heathen ? Does God start from Jerusalem to travel ? 

How much does it cost to support worship in the 
city ? Does God like gold on a silver plate ? 

How much does it cost to support worship in the 
country ? Is God humble out of town ? 

How much does it cost to save a sinner ? If a man 
has money can he ride on the cars ? 

How much money does man devote to God ? If a 
man could fly would he be more useful ? 

With what class of worshippers is God the most 
pleased ? If a man paints his house white will it reflect 
the sun better ? 

How much ought a church to cost ? How wide a 
channel ought to be made for the passage of a river. 

How much ought to be paid to the preacher ? How 
large a tunnel does it need to pour water into bottles ? 

How much ought man to pay for singing ? How far 
can man hear the lowing of cattle ? 

How much ought the congregation to contribute after 
service ? If a man’s corn does not come up is it lost ? 


19 


218 


GOD OF THE COST. 


How much money ought man to devote for the educa¬ 
tion of children. How much does it cost to tame a 
canary bird ? 

If man does not pay for preaching will the word of 
God be lost. If a man cuts down the trees will the 
birds fly away ? 

Is one working for God if »he gives Bibles to the 
poor ? Will a hog grow fat the more corn it has ? 

How much will new hymn books cost ? Can the 
poor take old hymn books and buy bread ? 

How much will it cost to carpet the church ? Can 
the poor have a new path to heaven ? 

How much will it cost to buy an organ ? Will the 
street players give up their business ? 

How much will it cost to build the church in a better 
locality ? Can God give preemption claims ? 

How much will an artist charge to give a new model 
for the church ? What amount of taxes goes to the 
poor ? 

How much will it cost to buy new prayer books ? 
How many miles is it to a person in need ? 

How much will it cost to get up a donation for the 
minister ? How far is it to the alms-house ? 

How much does it cost to preach Christ to the poor ? 
What does it cost to get harlots punished ? 

How much does it cost to dress the minister ? If a 
harlot is without a home will she be driven from every 
door ? 

How much does it cost to tell the world of Christ’s 
sufferings ? Is there weeping among the despised ? 

Can harlots go without food and clothing ? How 
much does a church cost ? 


GOD THE AUTHOR. 


219 


Can the family of a drunkard suffer for want of food ? 
How much does it cost to ordain a preacher ? 

In every instance that man does not seek joy 
from his love, he seeks it through mercenary interests 
which he can buy and sell. Every anticipated joy of the 
future can he bought and sold. If man supposes that 
he shall spend eternity in the presence of his God, or 
that Christ will welcome him to heaven, — houses not 
made with hands, to the New Jerusalem, or to the 
highest sphere, he supposes that he must do something 
in this present moment of time to secure the wished for 
end. It makes no difference whether it is faith or 
works, it is the same act of commerce. But* the joy of 
love can not be posponed to^the future ; for the love that 
man has faith in he possesses. 


ARTICLE XXI. 

GOD THE AUTHOR. 

Did God commence to work before the old ages ? 
Will God be at work after the old ages are passed 
away ? 

Can God hold worlds in his hand ? Can God help 
a starving child ? 

Can God stop the sun in his course ? Can God sow 
wheat in the fields ? 

Can God be at every place at the same time ? Can 
God be at one place in one moment of time ? 

Can God make it light through the universe ? Can 
God make it dark every where ? 



220 


GOD THE AUTHOR. 


Can God produce a flood ? Can God make a stream 
of water flow ? 

Can God make it thunder ? Can God make the wind 
whistle ? 

Can God destroy worlds ? Can God create insects ? 

Can God unmoor the land and make it float on the 
waters ? Can God build a boat and send it from shore 
to shore ? 

Can God build cities ? Can God drain a swamp ? 

Can God make nations tremble ? Can God give to*the 
dying courage ? 

Can God make bigots fly to the mountains ? Can God 
teach an infant to smile ? 

Can God make a traitor shake with fear ? Can God 
make an animal fawn on the hand that slays it ? 

Can God redeem harlots and make them pure ? Can 
God make the pure know corruption ? 

Can God destroy the world by fire ? Can God put 
out fires by water ? 

Can God sow the earth and make every thing grow ? 
Can God parch the earth with heat so that nothing can 
be seen ? 

Can God fashion man’s body so that every action shall 
be one of torment ? Can God change man’s being so 
that every emotion shall be one of pleasure ? 

Can God hate and love ? Can God weep and laugh ? 

Can God be known and published to man ? Can God 
talk or whisper to whom he will ? 

Can God commence and make a new universe ? Can 
God lay down to sleep ? 

In saying that God is the author of all things, no 
definite action of God can be specified. Man, in raising 


GOD OF FEAR. 


221 


his hand, may say that it is the action of God ; but there 
is an infinity of action taking place at the same moment, 
and every action in infinity is connected, and also every 
action that ever did or will take place is connected with 
every action at the present moment to the consciousness 
of man. Man knows of the action of things after his 
conception, but he can not know the action of infinity, 
because he does not know the cause or effect of a single 
action that ever did or will take place. When man 
says in a particular instance, God acted, he mentions an 
action of infinity as it comes to his notice. Man has no 
means of knowing that any action that comes to his 
notice, comes from any one source more than another. 


ARTICLE XXII. 

THE GOD OF FEAR. 

Did God ever tear children to pieces ? Does Satan 
seek to devour the ungodly ? 

Does God command man to fear him ? Is God un- 
happy? 

Is Christ making intercession before God for sinners ? 
Can God blaspheme ? 

Was God willing to save the world if Christ suffered 
on the cross ? Is God progressing ? 

Will God bind Satan fora thousand years? Can God 
have a sheriff after him ? 

Will God pour out his wrath on the cities ? 
feel blood-thirsty ? 


Can God 



222 


GOD OF FEAR. 


Is God’s curse resting on the Jews ? Can God clinch 
with his teeth ? 

Did God destroy the Egyptians in the Bed Sea ? Does 
God slay martyrs ? 

Will God be merciful if man shouts his praise ? 
Will God dance on the mountains ? 

Will God visit the iniquities of men upon the fourth 
generation ? If God should meet a tiger would he fight ? 

Did God destroy all the people of Sodom and Gomor¬ 
rah ? Will God find his death written on the wall ? 

Did God send the children of Israel into captivity ? 
If God should receive a public dinner would he be 
pacified ? 

Every fear and anxiety originates in the selfish feelings. 
Man can not be free from fear and anxiety until he is 
free from selfishness. If man has a selfish love, he 
must have fear and anxiety respecting it. If man has 
an attachment for any position in society, in this or in the 
future world, that attachment must bring doubts and 
fears. Every attachment is a preferred result, about 
which there is an uncertainty. By fear is implied that 
something could take place different from what it should; 
which, if it is possible, nothing could take place as it 
should. Man can not be free from fear, if he has a 
doubt that any thing could take place different from 
what it should, or if he has not faith that all action is a 
manifestation of love. Every act of man is an act of 
faith ; and consequently, if he acts in one moment of time, 
doubting that every thing is a manifestation of love, or 
that any thing could take place different from what it 
should, he must have fears and anxieties. If man teaches 
any opinions or doctrines in which he implies that any 


GOD OF WOMAN. 


223 


thing could take place different from what it should, he 
must be subject to fears and anxiety. 

It is selfish to have any fears of any future condition. . 

It is selfish to have any fears respecting any future 
moment in time. 

It is selfish to have any fears of hell. 

It is selfish to have any fears of God, Christ, Holy 
Ghost, or the devil. 

It is selfish to fear the approach of death. 

It is selfish to dread death by any disease, or in any 
manner. 

It is selfish to be troubled by fear in any circum¬ 
stances of danger, — by fire or epidemical disease. 

It is selfish to fear the approach of old age. 

It is selfish to be troubled by fear in any circum¬ 
stances in which it is possible for man to be placed. 

It is selfish to have any fears of the loss of property, 
or of reputation. 

It is selfish in man to dread to do any thing which he 
decides to be an act of love, on account of God, angels, 
devils, the dead, ghosts, spirits, night-robbers, assassins, 
death, torture, or the loss or gain of any thing in the 
universe. 


ARTICLE XXIII. 

THE GOD OF WOMAN. 

Would man like to be married for the sake of indul¬ 
gence ? When man is married will he .join the church ? 
Did Paul say if man’s passions were excited he had 



224 


GOD OF WOMAN. 


better marry ? Can a man keep dogs at borne in the 
spring ? 

If a man sleeps with a harlot can he join the church ? 
If a man marries is he sanctified ? 

Ought women to do house-work ? Ought men to own 
dogs ? 

Will it degrade women to vote ? Will it exalt 
women to die from the effects of indulgence ? 

Will it degrade women to talk politics ? Will it 
exalt them to have no relief from the care of children ? 

Will it degrade women to make speeches in public ? 
Will it exalt women to wash clothes ? 

Will it degrade women to own property ? Will it 
exalt women to spend their lives in drudgery ? 

Did God command women to obey their husbands ? 
Does God think men in danger ? 

If women have property must they give it to their 
husbands ? If a dog has a bone must the master take it ? 

Ought women to be allowed to ask men to be their 
husbands ? Ought harlots to be allowed to ask men to 
go home with them ? 

Ought women to buy and sell horses ? Ought women 
to wear diamond rings ? . 

Every position man assumes for himself or others, 
becomes a selfish love. Will man say what women 
ought to be, and what they ought to do ? 

If woman has not the same privilege as man, then 
both are in bondage. This bondage imposes conditions 
which may take both long to overcome ; for whatever 
privilege one being assumes in preference to another, 
becomes a selfish condition that he must leave before he 
can be free. The more limited the condition of 


GOD OF WOMAN, 


225 


woman is, the more she has to learn ; the more privileges 
man assumes in preference to woman, the more he has to 
overcome; for that being only is free that would give 
freedom to others. 

Woman should not be prevented from performing all 
kinds of labor. If it were true that woman should not 
be allowed all privileges allowed to man, woman could 
never find liberty; because if one can possess what 
another is denied, liberty is dependent on conditions 
which must destroy it, for conditions are constantly 
changing. 

Woman should not think herself dependent on the 
method which society prescribes for a husband. Woman 
as well as man, should do things to be faithful; and if 
she acknowledges any kind of bondage or dependence, 
she can not love. The restraints which individuals feel 
from the influences of others, are in consequence of 
their own selfish attachment to prescribed methods or 
opinions. It is selfish love that binds beings in society ; 
and the same bondage will accompany them every where. 
All should seek to be free from bondage without fear of 
the opinions of others. The woman that feels no de¬ 
pendence on man, or any one else, is free ; for freedom 
can come to all, no difference in what condition placed. 
But if woman acknowledges a dependence on man, or on 
the rules of society, she is in bondage. 

Marriage should not be sought for personal or selfish 
gratification. Whoever is seeking marriage, should 
watch over their imagination and their passions. If man 
would marry for the purpose of indulgence, his bondage 
has increased. The married should seek to be faithful, 
and believe that any indulgence for personal gratifica r 


226 


APPEARING GOD. 


tion prevents joy. Whoever is seeking marriage for any 
selfish purpose, after the degree of that selfishness, is in 
bondage. Woman is not for the gratification of selfish 
desires ; and marriage should not he for the indulgence 
of passion. 

If man loves, he will seek to make others free ; and if 
he finds any that are depending on him, his control will 
be exerted to give them freedom, by teaching them to be 
dependent on no one. Women should not be for the 
service of man, or for his selfish desires, any more than 
the flowers. 

Before man or woman can be free, they must learn 
to live in purity with each other ; for if one can be 
placed in any condition, and be tempted or overcome by 
selfish desires, he or she is not free. Whatever is or 
would be a temptation to man, is a condition that must 
be overcome. If man should think that indulgence of 
passions was selfish, and for that reason should abstain 
from marriage, he is practicing self-denial, which gives 
him no strength. 


" ARTICLE XXIV. 

THE APPEARING COD, 

If man does not have a new hat will he stay from 
church ? Do fish die if they are taken from the water ? 

If a bonnet is soiled will the person stay at home ? 
Do mice run to their holes at the approach of cats ? 

If a parlor is not furnished will friends be received ? 
Do foxes stay in their holes for fear of dogs ? 



APPEARING GOD. 227 

Will man go to the celebration if he has a new car¬ 
riage ? Does a bird stop singing when it is moulting ? 

When a man’s house is finished will he receive the 
governor ? Will the animals of the forest approach at 
the sight of man ? 

Man can give attention to the rules of society; but 
they become a selfish love when he attaches any im¬ 
portance to them. Man can respect the selfish attach¬ 
ments of others ; for he has no means of knowing that 
acts of love are better than acts of selfishness. But if 
man adopts the selfish attachment of another, he then 
commits an act of selfishness. To be free, it must make 
no difference with man what kind of clothing he wears. 
He can not prefer one kind of a coat to that of another 
on account of appearance, nor for appearance can he 
prefer being clothed to being naked, or prefer being 
naked to being clothed ; but he can clothe himself as an 
act of love, to respect the selfish attachment of those 
who prefer clothing. It is as selfish in man to prefer 
being without clothing as to prefer being clothed. If a 
man would prefer the society where they are without 
clothes, it is selfish ; for he can not prove that a man is 
any better without than he is with; and if a man would 
prefer living in a society where they are clothed to 
where they are naked, it is selfish ; for he can not prove 
that one condition is better than the other. Man, to be 
free, must have no selfish preference for being clothed 
to being naked, or for being naked to being clothed; for 
if he has a selfish attachment for one condition, to be 
thrown into the other would be shame and grief. 


228 


GOD OF DECEPTION. 


ARTICLE XXV. 

THE GOD OF DECEPTION. 

Do persons invite their neighbors to call and see them 
when they wish them to stay away ? Ought children to 
be punished for telling secrets ? 

Will man, in the society of a lady, be more affable in 
manner ? Will man leave a beggar as soon as possible ? 

If man has a scar on his face will he sing in the 
choir ? If man has a mole on his hand will he wear 
gloves ? 

Can a garment be fitted so that deformities can not be 
seen ? Can one walk and not show that he is lame ? 

Will man be younger if he wears false hair ? Can 
man wear a hat in a fashionable manner ? 

Will people think a man rich if he comes from a 
foreign country ? Can a man marry into an influential 
family if he is thought wealthy ? 

Does man like to sit in a pew with ladies ? Do 
ladies teach religion ? 

Would man pass for an individual of wealth and 
beauty ? Is there virtue in knowing how one stands 
in the community ? 

Every act of life is changing man. In every act 
necessary to a new love, he requires a new faith. It re¬ 
quires faith to believe that a person can live where 
deception is practiced and not practice it. Deception, 
no difference under what circumstances used, must take 
man from the joy of love. 

In instances where men say one thing and mean 
another, knowing they shall be understood correctly, 


GOD OF DECEPTION. 


229 


they deprive themselves of joy. Whatever is said in 
words, a power of will has been exercised; and if it is a 
false action it must have its effect as much as any other. 
If man would love, he should be truthful under all cir¬ 
cumstances ; he should not say no or yes in jest, when 
he means the opposite ; and he never should intimate one 
thing and mean another, by word, look, or gesture. 
Man deprives himself of joy, if in receiving thanks, he 
makes some jesting reply. 

Much of the misunderstandings among men arise in 
consequence of deceptive and joking replies. Language, 
in its best uses, is often misunderstood. Man should 
ever seek to avoid speaking in a doubtful manner. 

Ought children to be answered truthfully when they 
ask questions ? Is it a pleasure to man to perplex others 
with doubts ? Let all questioners receive a truthful an¬ 
swer, when answers can be given. Man should consider 
if it is not pride that causes him to use deception. 

If jests are the saying of one thing and the meaning 
of another, they are selfish. 

Man, in writing or speaking, should use words to 
express his meaning as nearly as he can; and in his 
account of events he should not say things that did not 
occur, for the purpose of effect. 

It is not necessary to deceive in order to make others 
do good ; because in using deception to do good, 
one can not know that the wished for good will 
take place; and if it should, who shall judge whether 
it is for the best ? Man can not tell the result of any 
action; therefore, he should have faith that the result 
will be the best in never using deception. 

Man should not try to enhance his joys by feigning 
20 


230 


SECRET GOD. 


to possess any thing he has not; by pretending he has 
done any thing which he has not done ; or will do things 
he does not intend to do; or try to exaggerate in telling sto¬ 
ries to make them appear sufficiently famous or ludicrous. 

Man should not fail to be truthful in his speech and 
dealings, for the faithful have nothing to fear. In ceas¬ 
ing to use deception he may be obliged in instances to 
adopt a new calling to gain subsistence; but he should 
not fear to do this, but endeavor to see in it joy. For 
man to say that he will gain his living by any particular 
method is selfish ; and it may be appointed that he shall 
know a new love in other methods than in those he de¬ 
sires. Therefore, man should have faith, and never use 
deception under any circumstances. 


ARTICLE XXV I. 

THE SECRET GOD. 

Does man seek for indulgence in secret ? Ought 
birds to keep in the woods ? 

If no one should know of it, would man make money 
by selling liquor ? Does man take plants into the house 
to make them grow ? 

If a man is engaged to be married will he keep it 
from the world ? Do birds fly in the night to find their 
mates ? 

Does man wish to be alone with his betrothed ? If 
the sun should not shine would it be better ? 

Would man get rich by selling slaves secretly? Will 
man spend money in educating children ? 



SECRET GOD. 


231 

It is selfish in man to seek for any information because 
it is a secret. 

It is selfish in man to tell or refrain from telling any 
thing, on account of any selfish interest. 

It is selfish to enact to make compulsatory the giving 
of evidence in any court. It is selfish in man to seek 
to give evidence for the purpose of punishing, or for the 
promotion of any selfish interest. 

It is selfish to clothe any portion of the body on 
account of any feeling of shame and disgrace. Man, in 
covering any portion of his body, must do so from his love 
to protect him from the weather, and to meet the de¬ 
mand of those who would be annoyed, or would feel 
shame and disgrace in consequence. Man can not prove 
that he is in a superior condition when clothed than 
when without clothes ; and if he would feel any shame 
in either condition, he is not free. It is selfish in 
any one, to anxiously seek to have society without 
clothes or with clothes ; for man can not be 
attached to one condition in preference to the other, 
except through the selfish feelings. It is selfish in man 
to have an attachment for clothing ; and also selfish to 
have an attachment for the condition of people without 
clothes. Man can prefer one condition to that of 
the other from his love, when to his conception it 
would be a good, providing he had no attachment for 
either. 

It is selfish in man to be influenced by any selfish 
motives in keeping any thing a secret; and when thus 
influenced the action is deception. 

It is selfish in man to tell any thing because it is a 
secret; or for any cause, except in his estimation it would 


232 


FUTURE GOD. 


produce a good. It is selfish in man to refrain from 
telling any thing, because it is a secret, when by so 
doing he can confer a good. 

It is selfish in man to keep any thing secret because 
of the opinion of the world. It is selfish in man to tell 
any thing because of the opinion of the world. 

It is selfish in man to have any fears that any thing 
he ever done or said shall become known to the world. 


ARTICLE XXV II . 

THE FUTURE GOD. 

Is man free from care after death ? Does the wind 
blow where there is no air ? 

Does a good man go to heaven after death ? Will a 
dam keep water from running ? 

Do the wicked go to hell ? Do whales swallow the 
small fish ? 

Will man sing God’s praises forever in the future 
world ? Will pumps force water to high places ? 

Would man after death go to the highest sphere ? 
Would man like to die wealthy ? 

Can not man talk with beings below a certain sphere ? 
Can a man talk with common people ? 

If a man dies does he go to a higher life ? Is the 
mouth of a river higher than its source ? 

Can man only discern progressed beings in the future 
world ? Is man able to see ragged children ? 

Is man unable to see degraded beings in the future 
world ? Can man see beggars in the street ? 



FUTURE GOD. 


233 

Does a man think himself in the highest sphere ? 
Are mountainous districts the most healthy ? 

Will a good man go into the presence of his God ? 
Does God like carpeted floors ? 

Will Christ direct the wicked to hell? If Christ 
was never in hell does he know the way ? 

Will the good walk the streets of the New Jerusalem ? 
Has any one purchased city lots ? 

Will man find his heavenly mansion ? Does man 
travel by means of a compass ? 

W ill it be beautiful to dwell among the angels ? Is 
man unhappy if he soils his garments ? 

Will the good have all their desires gratified in the 
future world ? Ought honey to be always before a man 
that loves it ? 

Does man talk about the spirits ? Ought man to call 
horses nags ? 

The same selfishness that leads man to prefer condi¬ 
tions in this world, leads him to prefer them for the 
future. The future selfish attachment that man has 
may cause him to relinquish his present selfish loves ; 
but he is no better for moving them to different objects. 
It is as selfish in man to seek any future condition as it 
is selfish to seek fame, wealth, or ease, or any of the 
pleasures of life. By selfishly loving a future condition, 
he relinquishes what he supposes now will interfere with 
the possession of it; but there is no more credit in doing 
this than there would be in his suddenly changing his 
desire to become rich, to become famous. He alters his 
plans to seek another condition of selfish love. Man may 
imagine there is a future heaven to be gained, and hell 
to be avoided ; a high sphere to which he would go, and 


20* 




£34 GOD OF THE PRESENT MOMENT. 

a low one from which he would keep away ; he is as 
selfish in seeking these conditions as he is in seeking 
the pleasures of appetite. No one is better except 
through love. 


ARTICLE XXVIII. 

THE GOD OF THE PRESE'NT MOMENT. 

If a man repents before death will God save him ? If 
a man repents after death will God damn him ? 

If a man joins the church will he be saved from a 
future hell ? If a man is to go to a future hell ought 
he to join the church ? 

Is this a life of probation for the future ? Is the 
future a life of damnation because of existence in this 
world ? 

Ought men to prepare for judgment after death ? On 
which end of eternity will God judge ? 

Ought men to prepare to meet God ? Does God set 
up any claims to importance ? 

Ought men to labor to save souls ? Where ought a 
man’s salvation to commence ? 

Ought men to grieve when the impenitent die ? 
Should the hour in which the poor were born be cursed ? 

Does God will to have all men saved ? Does Satan 
will to have all men damned ? 

Did God send Christ that the world might be saved ? 
Ought Christ to come if he could not save the world ? 

Did Christ die that he might save the world ? If 



GOD OF TRUTH. 


235 


Christ had died more than once would he have saved 
more ? 

Was Christ appointed to die? Was Judas Iscariot 
appointed to be damned ? 

Ought the dying be told they shall be damned? 
Ought Christ to give encouragement to thieves ? 

When a man dies is he free from care ? Is a man 
free if he has nothing to do ? 

What moment in the existence of man is more im¬ 
portant than another ? Is death a critical hour ? Is 
that time in which fortunes seem about to change 
hands of more importance ? Is that time when an 
election is held the more to be valued? No one 
moment in time can become more important to man 
than another, except through selfishness. Man should 
see all moments of time as appointed for him to love ; 
and that period in time which is the present moment 
of his existence as the time to love, free from selfish 
interests, past, present, and future. 


ARTICLE XXIX. 

THE GOD OF TRUTn. 

What church ought a man to join in order to be 
saved ? On what part of the wheel of a windmill does 
the wind strike ? 

Ought a man to believe the Bible in order to be 
saved ? Ought a man to be damned for believing the 
Koran ? 


236 


GOD OF TRUTH. 


Ought a man to be turned out of church on account 
of heresy? Ought the churches to be damned for 
disbelieving each other? 

Who has the most truth ? Who has the most 
heresy ? 

Who loves God the best ? Who pays most to sup¬ 
port preaching ? 

Can a man be saved if he rejects Christ ? Is asking a 
blessing better than feeding a hungry horse ? 

Is a man’s example bad if he stays from public 
worship ? Is an idle man sanctified in church ? 

Should a man believe in the Father, Son, and Holy 
Ghost ? To whom ought men to pray in their prayers ? v 

Should a man believe in Christ as a mediator ? If 
Christ is weary will he forget the heathen ? 

Ought Christ to have the credit of all truth ? Ought 
any one to be punished for trying to discover truth ? 

Whatever comes to man as truth must be such to 
him, whether he receives it on the authority of others 
or through his conceptions. In either case, he should 
know that no other being has a conception of truth like 
himself; consequently, his faith in love should tell 
him that whatever he does believe in one moment of 
time is the truth for him in that moment. If he 
rejects this faith, he must believe that in all moments 
of time what he does believe is false. Man will 
always be finite, and know no more of infinity at one 
time than another; therefore, he never can arrive at 
that moment that he can demonstrate his truth. Ac¬ 
cordingly, whatever beings believe as truth is for them 
to believe, or they can not believe any thing to be truth 
in any moment of time ; for all beings, whether to their 


GOD OF TRUTH. 


237 


own consciousness or not, are constantly changing. 
Should man contend with his brother about truth ? 
Should man go to his neighbor and wish him to accept 
his truth that he may be happy ? Man can not feel 
that the truth he possesses is superior to the truth of 
any other being, except through selfishness; for one 
believes as much as another what is appointed for him 
to believe. 

Why is a person in a society liked, and out of that 
society despised ? Does a man like his brother church 
members, and are they the less dear to him because he 
has left them ? If so, has he bettered himself by 
leaving ? Has he done more than to change his 
selfish loves into a new channel ? Who shall judge 
infinity ? What is truth ? Man should be equally 
courteous to those who despise his belief as to those 
who adopt it, and see one his brother as much as the 
other. Man can give to others, as an act of love ; but 
never in contention; for contention produces dislikes, 
while acts of love produce love. 

Who discovered truth ? 

Was an angel appointed to give truth ? 

Was Christ appointed to give truth ? 

Is the truth in the Bible superior to any other ? 

Should the truth that Paul taught be believed ? 

Should the opinion of departed beings be believed ? 

Man should not suppose that his opinion of what is 
truth is superior or inferior to that of any being that 
ever has or will exist. If he believes that an angel has 
a better conception of truth than himself, he must be¬ 
lieve that his conception of truth is not for him in the 
present moment of existence, which must lead him to 


GOD OF TRUTH. 


238 

be dissatisfied. Bat when, by truth, is meant an opinion 
who Christ was ; whether there are three Gods or one ; 
whether the Bible was inspired ; whether Christ died 
for the ungodly ; whether the dead can communicate 
'with the living, it is of no importance except through 
selfishness. It is an act of selfishness in man to devote 
his time to the spread of any particular class of opinions ; 
because he can not do so except he is selfishly attached 
to them. Why is it important for the world to know 
whether the dead can talk with the living ? Man can 
not prove that any being in the future world is superior to, 
or has more truth than any being in this ; for where 
shall be found any being but what is finite ? and what 
finite being shall measure infinity ? When a man under¬ 
takes to spread his opinion of what is truth he invites 
contention, for another being does not exist that believes 
as himself; and it becomes as selfish in him to contend 
about opinions as it does for nations or individuals to go 
to war about possessions. Man should not say when 
the world believes right, it will do right, for who shall 
judge what is the correct belief in any moment of time ; 
and if man has not a correct belief in one myment of 
time, he never can have; for he must always be finite. 
The same selfishness that leads man to try to spread his 
opinion, leads him to seek for the conquest of terri¬ 
tory ; and one is of no more consequence than the other, 
except through selfish interests. A man may say that 
his opinion is based on facts that can be established by 
witnesses ; and therefore, he would spend his time in 
laboring to give facts to the people. Whatever a man 
does believe is a fact to him, whether established by 
witnesses or not; and a man has presumed selfishly to 


GOD OF TRUTH. 


239 


judge when he presumes that a fact to his conception 
should be believed. There will be as great a diversity 
of opinions respecting what facts should be believed as 
what truths. Man can give love as an act of love; but when 
he would devote all his time in promulgating any class 
of opinions as truth, he has a selfish attachment that 
will prevent acts of love. For persons to devote their 
lives in spreading the truth that there are three Gods, 
or that there is one God of love, or that man is exposed 
to a future hell, or that the Sabbath should not be 
broken, or that all men shall be saved, or that the 
departed can talk with the living, or that man should 
believe in necessity, is selfishness. Man can not spend 
his life in teaching any one of these things as an act of 
love ; for he is presuming that what he teaches should 
be believed, when he can obtain no proof why his opin¬ 
ion should be believed in preference to that of any other 
being. His opinions are his conceptions of truth in the 
moment of time that he has them; and so it is with all. 
He may go to teach another his opinions, when as an 
act of love he should go to help him hoe corn or chop 
wood. It is also selfishness in man to do acts of kind¬ 
ness to others, with reference to influencing them in 
their opinions ; for he has no proof that his opinion is 
superior to that of another. 

When by truth is meant a conception of duty, the 
same difference of opinion must exist; and the opinion of 
one can not be called superior to that of another. One 
may believe that it is his duty to go to church, another 
to praise God, another to help the poor, another to fight 
for his country, another to preach Christ, another to 
preach immortality, and another that the dead can talk 


240 


SACRED GOD. 


with, the living ; all these conceptions of duty are for each 
person in that moment of time that he has them ; but 
when one of these persons assumes that another shall 
do as himself, he claims a superiority to his opinion on 
account of a selfish attachment. What man may esteem 
as duty may be an act of selfishness to perform ; but no 
one can say but what acts of selfishness should be per¬ 
formed ; although they can never take place without a 
subsequent conviction of selfishness, or else man would 
never know that he was or that it would be possible for him 
to be selfish. It is not always an act of love in man, to tell 
another what is his conviction of duty. Man should 
seek to do acts of love continually ; but what would be 
an act of love in one moment, would not be in another, 
and what would be an act of love to one individual 
would not be to another ; therefore, man can not select 
any one of his conceptions of duty and say that he will 
always do or teach it, for in doing so he would interfere 
with acts of love. 


ARTICLE XXX. 

THE SACRED GOD. 

Have any divine thoughts been discovered ? Ought 
Peter to see a vision that every thing was common ? 

Is worship to God a holy duty ? Should the water 
of wells be considered better than that of rivers ? 

Has any one read sacred history ? Has any one dis¬ 
covered a gold mine ? 



SACRED GOD. 


241 


Are divine writings superior to the writings of man ? 
Is a man superior if he is taller than another. 

What are the sacred duties of life ? Is the air purer 
when it is confined ? 

Ought God to be spoken of with reverence ? Ought 
birds to sing on Sunday morning ? 

Is the calling of a preacher holy ? Is a preacher’s 
wife consecrated ? 

Is Sunday a holy day ? On what day ought men to 
be hung ? 

Should every sentence in the Bible be spoken of with 
veneration ? At what moment in time does God sanctify 
a church ? 

Should the Holy Ghost be spoken of with reverence ? 
Ought children to be frightened ? 

Would man leave this vain world and sing with 
Gabriel ? Ought owls to see better in the night ? 

Is man seeking a divine abode ? Can a heavenly 
mansion be contained within the walls of a church ? 

Is man seeking the kingdom of Christ ? Do birds fly 
better when higher in the air ? 

Has any one found the kingdom of heaven ? If a 
man is seeking God ought he to look up ? 

Has any one discovered the Golden Age ? Ought any 
one to dust their knees after praying on them ? 

Is this world full of vanity ? What quantity of flies 
ought there to be ? 

Will the dead rise to meet their Lord in the air ? 
Ought two vessels to meet each other on the seas ? 

Will an angel come to earth and say that God is holy ? 
Is the noise of crickets divine when they are not seen ? 

Nothing becomes sacred, superior, or preferred, except 


21 


242 


GOD OF ETIQUETTE. 


through some selfish attachment. To try to make any¬ 
thing uncommon or superior is the same as endeavoring 
to remove it from man. If there is any thing that man 
exalts, he cannot be free. If man is continually seeking 
to hear angel voices, he never will have any means of 
knowing whether he hears them or not, and he might 
listen to beings he would call angels and neglect to do 
acts of love. 


ARTICLE XXXI. 

THE GOD OF ETIQUETTE. 

Did Satan visit God to talk about Job ? Does God 
know how to receive company ? 

Did God talk to Moses from the burning bush ? Do 
the subjects of Satan dwell in fire ? 

Did God talk to Moses from the mountain ? Has God 
an aversion to swamps ? 

Did God request Moses to tell the people not to 
approach Sinai when he was talking to him ? Has God 
read the latest works on etiquette ? 

Did God drown the Egyptians in the Red Sea ? Is 
God acquainted with the Golden Rule ? 

Did God send a pillar of fire in front of the Israel¬ 
ites ? How long did it take the Israelites to find Canaan ? 

If a man purchases goods, ought he to go home and 
send another for them ? Is it agreeable for a man to 
walk and have his feet pinched in tight shoes ? 

Ought men to dress in black ? Ought women to 
dress in white ? 



GOD OF ETIQUETTE. 


243 


Ought a man to carry his valise ? Ought Christ to 
have rode on an ass colt ? 

Ought women to wear thin shoes ? Ought servants 
to wear brogans ? 

Does satin make women lovely ? Does calico make 
servants hateful ? 

Ought soft soap to be used by women ? Ought rings 
to be worn by servants ? 

Ought a man to wash his own clothes ? Did Satan 
teach servants to wash ? 

Ought a man to sit at the table beside a colored 
person ? Ought the African race to be kept at home ? 

Ought a man to do house-work ? Did God make an 
act of prayer holy ? 

Ought a man to write a book and address himself to 
young ladies ? Do wolves prefer mutton ? 

Ought a man to write a book and address himself to 
young men ? At what hour ought old men and women 
to die ? 

At what hour ought man to take his dinner ? Do 
men get hungry and over eat ? 

At what hour ought servants to rise ? At what period 
ought girls to learn music ? 

Ought a woman to hoe corn ? Will cattle die if fed 
by a woman ? 

The selfishness that causes man to exalt his God, man, 
or the Bible, causes him to exalt his preferred kinds of 
labor, positions, and forms of society. 


244 


GOD OF DISAPPOINTMENT. 


ARTICLE XXXII. 

THE GOD OF DISAPPOINTMENT. 

Ought a man to kill himself if he loses his property ? 
Where does money go ? 

Ought a man to join the church to be respectable ? 
Does God sanctify the respectable church ? 

Ought a man to grieve if some one refuses to marry 
him ? Can a woman send a man to hell ? 

Ought a man to worry about his reputation ? Ought 
children to cry for bread ? 

Ought a man to be afraid of error ? Ought the 
stumps of trees to be left in the highway ? 

Ought a man to be afraid that he shall not obtain a 
living ? Ought Indians to appear among the civilized ? 

Ought man to be afraid he will not appear fashionable ? 
Will the streets of the new Jerusalem be paved with 
gold ? 

Ought man to be afraid that he will .miss the society 
of women ? When the bells of factories ring ought 
people to stay in their houses ? 

Ought woman to seek the society of men ? At what 
age ought woman to be married ? 

Ought a woman to go to market ? Do horses prefer 
spring water ? 

Ought man to be afraid he shall be cheated ? Ought 
man to will his property to the church ? 

Ought man to be afraid he shall not be famous ? 
Ought man to run against the wind ? 

The will of the free always takes place, inasmuch as 
they will that every thing should take place as it is to 




GOD OF NEEDS. 


245 


take place ; for every thing is a manifestation of love. 
But the definite acts of willing by the selfish are as 
likely to take place as the acts of willing by the free; 
but if the will of the selfish does not take place they 
are disappointed, according to the strength of their 
selfish attachments ; but the free are not disappointed 
if their will does not take place ; but presume whether 
it does or not, that it is joy; for every thing that does 
take place is a manifestation of love. 


ARTICLE XXXIII. 

THE GOD OF NEEDS. 

Man actually needs that which he obtains ; because 
if man can not possess in one moment of time what he 
should, he never can possess what he should. What 
man actually obtains in each and all moments of time, 
are his real needs ; for every thing is a manifestation of 
love. Man may desire from his love what he may not 
obtain ; but in this instance he is under the necessity of 
believing that it is a manifestation of love that he does 
not obtain it. To be free, man must see his real needs 
to be those things which he obtains, and see in them his 
joy as a manifestation of love. 


21 * 



246 


GOD OF WONDER. 


ARTICLE XXXIV. 

THE GOD OF WONDER. 

Has any one discovered the mundane cause ? Does 
any one know how the lowing of cattle produces vibra¬ 
tions in the atmosphere ? 

Has any one discovered the origin of the odylic 
force ? Has any one discovered why water seeks an 
equilibrium ? 

Has the question been settled about spirit emanations ? 
Have sparks of fire any tendencies ? 

Has any one discovered the law of attraction ? ^Vhat 
force is necessary to overcome a rolling stone ? 

Has any one discovered the invariable laws of 
nature ? Has any one discovered the tendencies of 
mad dogs ? 

Has any one been spiritually impressed ? Did God 
impress man to write the Bible ? 

Has any one talked with the dead? Are the poor 
visited in alms-houses ? 

Things become wonderful, marvellous, and superior to 
man through a selfish desire to distinguish himself by 
relating them, and through a selfish dread of or attach¬ 
ment to causes which to him appear unknown. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that any wonderful, 
marvellous, or miraculous thing can take place. Man 
can not prove that raising the dead, or the instantaneous 
cure of the sick, or walking on the water, is any more 
a miraculous deed than the raising of his hand. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that talking with God, 


GOD OF CRITICISM. 


247 



Christ, Holy Ghost, the ancient dead, angels, or devils, 
is any more wonderful than anything else. 

It is selfish to teach that God, Christ, Holy Ghost, or 
any being in the universe, ever did or can do any won¬ 
derful or miraculous thing. 


ARTICLE XXXV. 

THE GOD OF CRITICISM. 

Should thieves be punished ? Ought the treasury of 
the State to be exhausted for prisoners ? 

Has any one violated the rules of society ? Does God 
ordain all the powers ? 

Has any one written a book distinguished for literary 
merit ? At what church ought the people to worship ? 

Has any one written a book and violated the rules of 
syntax ? Who ordained laws pertaining to slavery ? 

Is any person’s style of writing too redundant ? How 
much water ought to run from the river into the sea ? 

Is any one squandering his property ? How much 
rain does the earth need ? 

Does any one leave the gate open ? When ought the 
frosts to come ? 

Does any one talk about his neighbors ? Do bees 
sting boys ? 

No one can find fault, except for the purpose of selfish 
gratification. Man should never specify any of the acts 
of life, except to his conception they would prevent 
acts of love. No one stand point that is made by 



248 


GOD OF CRITICISM. 


individuals or societies, can be proved superior to another. 
One may write a book and conform in its composition to 
the rules of the schools; but if he thinks the authority 
of the learned give a superior method, he has a selfish 
attachment that must be overcome before he can be free. 
Man may dress after the present rules of society, but if he 
thinks those garments superior that are made in the latest 
style, he has a selfish attachment that will prevent acts of 
love. Whoever criticises any of the acts of life to 
point out departures from established rules, must act 
from motives of selfishness. If it is of consequence 
whether man does things after a particular method he 
can never be free, because his joys must be always de¬ 
pendent. He who finds fault with the composition of 
books, must do so in order to tell the world that he is 
acquainted with the preferred authorities, or because he 
is himself selfishly attached to them. He who finds 
fault with another because he has violated any rules, has 
also a selfish attachment to those rules which he should 
seek to overcome. The same selfishness causes man to 
find fault with the thief and the murderer, and to seek 
their punishment. The acts of selfishness in another, 
are never cured except by acts of love. If man goes to 
the thief and tells him he is wrong, he would probably 
not be giving any new information, and if the thief deter¬ 
mines to continue in his course, he will dislike his adviser; 
but when he is visited because he is in trouble, he soon 
may commence to love. 

Shall the drunkard be told that he is wicked ? It 
would be better to help him home as often as he shall be 
in need of assistance. 


GOD OF REPENTANCE. 


249 




ARTICLE XXXYI. 

THE GOD OF REPENTANCE. 

How many times ought man to repent before death ? 
Does man always find what he seeks ? 

Ought man to weep over his wrongs ? Do children 
weep for the loss of playthings ? 

Ought man to join the church after repentance ? Do 
churches give promissory notes ? 

Ought man expect to go to heaven if he repents ? 
Do birds fly faster when frightened ? 

Does God call on the wicked world to repent ? Does 
God get frightened ? 

Does God offer to pardon men their sins ? Is God 
afraid to go any where ? 

Can Christ forgive sins ? Does any one know the 
way to a gold mine ? 

Man can make restitution for wrongs, but restitution 
of itself is of no consequence, and it only assumes con¬ 
sequence through attachment to conditions. It would 
be selfish in man to make restitution for an attachment 
to results which he might wish, or for any purpose 
excepting to produce love ; and it would be selfish in 
man not to make restitution, influenced by any selfish 
motives. If, by repentance, is meant to be sorry for 
any past act of life, it is an act of selfishness. Man 
should no more grieve over his selfish acts of the past, 
than over what he esteems his good acts ; for whatever 
takes place is a manifestation of love. He who is sorry 
for past wrongs, is likely to desire to escape all reflec¬ 
tions respecting them ; and in this way to seek other 


250 


GOD OF LAUGHTER. 


selfish conditions. He who is sorry for the wrongs of 
life, will be prevented from doing acts of love; for in 
seeking to escape them, he looses the strength they 
would give to overcome selfish influences. Man is 
not likely to grieve over those wrongs that bring to him 
the objects of selfish love, but over those where the 
result conflicts with them. It is selfish in man to seek 
that his wrongs may be blotted out. If man should 
blot out any event of his life, he should blot out all of 
them ; for to preserve the good of his life to think about, 
fosters pride and intolerance. If man supposes his wrongs 
are blotted out or forgiven, he is in a selfish and depend¬ 
ent condition ; and he can not see joy in similar conditions 
of life to those in which he previously did wrong. 
What finite being can judge infinite action, and say that 
one event more than another will give him liberty ? 
Let man think of his selfish acts instead of trying to 
escape them, or the conditions which they seem to 
impose upon him. 


ARTICLE XXXVII. 

THE GOD OF LAUGHTER. 

When ought a man to laugh ? When did the 
morning stars sing together ? 

When ought a man to weep ? When did God 
grieve that he had made man ? 

Is it healthy to laugh ? Is honey sweet ? 

If a man does not laugh is he unfit for society ? 



GOD OF LAUGHTER. 


251 


Ought a man to be turned out of church if he refuses to 
get on to his knees ? 

Ought a mail that runs after spirits be laughed at ? 
Ought the wind to make a noise in passing through 
crevices ? 

Ought the man that believes he shall be married 
after death be laughed at? Will any one be dis¬ 
appointed if they do not keep house in the New 
Jerusalem ? 

Ought the man that believes that spirits will make 
him handsome be laughed at? Would any one weep 
if he had had the small-pox ? 

Ought the man that believes that spirits will make 
him rich be laughed at? Would any one weep if he 
was obliged to beg in the street ? 

Ought the man that believes that spirits will find him 
a wife be laughed at ? For what purpose do the people 
seek marriage ? 

Ought the fanatical to be laughed at ? Does any one 
weep for the insane ? 

Ought the foolish to be laughed at ? Does any one 
weep for the simple ? 

Ought a man to exaggerate the events of life to 
make people laugh ? What events of life should man 
prefer for laughter ? 

Ought a man to laugh if he suddenly becomes rich ? 
Do the poor weep because they can not ride in a 
carriage ? 

Ought a man to laugh if he suddenly becomes 
famous ? How many are there that think fame is joy ? 

Ought a minister to be laughed at? Ought birds 
be laughed at when moulting ? 


252 


GOD OF ENJOYMENT. 


Ought a doctor of divinity to be laughed at ? Ought 
people to weep over standing water ? 

Ought a professor to be laughed at ? Is a hilly road 
objectionable ? 

Man should not think his follies or weaknesses superior 
to that of any other being. He who laughs must prefer 
moments in time, and must suppose that some of 
the events of life should be more honored and revered 
than others, which he can not show to be true except 
through his selfish feelings. 

It is selfish to laugh at the poor or misguided. 

It is selfish to make sport to amuse any one. 

It is selfish to say or do any thing with reference to 
exciting laughter. 


ARTICLE XXXVIII. 

THE GOD OF ENJOYMENT. 

Ought a man to go to the dance ? Ought a man to 
perspire in holding the plow ? 

Ought a man to visit the cities ? Ought a man to live 
on the mountains ? 

Ought a minister to seek to preach in the cities? 
What places are the most holy ? 

Ought a philosopher to live in the city ? Does 
nature delight in mortar and bricks ? 

Ought people to seek to live in the country ? Is 
grass more holy than the sand ? 

Ought people to travel to foreign countries ? Is a 
cave equal to a church ? 



GOD OF ENJOYMENT. 


253 


Ought people to wear fashionable clothes to meeting ? 
Does God despise clothes soiled with dust ? 

Ought a man seek to go to the theatre ? Ought 
Ja'cob to have had two wives ? 

Ought any one to seek for marriage ? Ought Isaac’s 
courtship to be related in the Bible ? 

Ought a man to joke with his friend ? Ought any 
one to march after solemn music ? 

Ought a man seek to see another hung ? Is human 
life sacred ? 

To seek any kind of enjoyment is selfish; for all 
enjoyments must arise from conditions. Enjoyment 
expects joy from some of the conditions of life; love 
expects no new joy from any of the conditions of life. 
Love expects no joy from the acts of love; for if joy 
was anticipated from any acts, it could not be from the 
acts of love. The joy of love arises from development; 
that of enjoyment is dependent on the changes of life. 
The joy of love ever continues, for none will go from 
joy-to misery; the joy of enjoyment is dependent, 
because any condition once attained must soon change. 
Hence, to seek any enjoyment or personal gratification is 
selfish. When by enjoyment is meant those conditions 
of life which man must seek to attain in order to be 
faithful over himself and others from his love, it is an 
act of love to seek it. But when by enjoyment is meant 
the seeking of any pastime, pleasure, amusement or 
any personal gratification, it is an act of selfishness to 
seek it; for it is dependent on the changes and condi¬ 
tions of life. 

The joy of enjoyment can be anticipated ; the joy of 
love can not be anticipated. The joy of love comes to 


22 


254 


GOD OF ENJOYMENT. 


man in the present moments of existence ; the joy of 
enjoyment is usually in the past or future. The joy of 
enjoyments can be bought and sold ; the joy of love can 
not be traded for any thing in the universe. Love sees 
joy every where manifested ; enjoyment looks for joy in 
the passions, appetites, and desires. To seek enjoyment 
is to seek misery ; to love is uninterrupted joy. To 
seek enjoyment is to have fear; to love is to be without 
fear. To seek enjoyment is bondage; love is liberty. 
To seek enjoyment is selfish ; love is joy without selfish¬ 
ness. To seek enjoyment is to possess unsatisfied 
desires and wants ; love gives joy, peace, and plenty. 
Enjoyment seeks for joy from preferred conditions ; love 
possesses joy now and forever. In seeking enjoyment 
man awakes in misery; in loving man awakes in joy. 
In seeking enjoyment man sees some things as hateful; 
in loving he sees everything as beautiful. In seeking 
enjoyment man finds enemies; in loving he can find 
only brothers and sisters. In seeking enjoyment man 
finds superior and inferior beings ; in loving he sees all 
as his equals. In seeking enjoyment man laughs at his 
brothers ; in loving he leads them to joy. In seeking 
enjoyment man grieves over misfortune ; in loving he 
sees all action to be a manifestation of love. In seeking 
enjoyment man tells how the world should do ; in loving 
he tries to free the world from selfish attachments. Man 
seeks enjoyment in a few of the conditions and changes 
of life ; love is joy in all of the conditions and changes of 
life. In seeking enjoyment man expects liberty from 
some of the changes of life ; love is liberty every where. 


GOD OF INFLUENCE. 


255 


ARTICLE XXXIX. 

THE GOD OF INFLUENCES. 

To be free man must have strength to overcome 
selfish influences. Among those who love man is invited 
to love ; and among the selfish he is invited to be selfish. 
Whatever man believes to be selfish he must have faith 
that it prevents joy ; and having established it in his 
mind as selfish and producing misery, he should try to 
withstand every conflicting influence, be it from habit or 
otherwise. Man should seek to be among his fellows 
from motives of love and not from curiosity or pleasure. 
When man seeks association from motives of selfishness 
he is in no condition to withstand selfish influences. 
The acts of love give to man strength. He that goes to 
places of amusement and pleasure from curiosity is 
likely to participate in them ; but he who goes from 
motives of love is not tempted. If man loves he is in 
a condition of purity and innocence that can not be 
corrupted or tempted; for as certainly as he possesses 
joy, he can not go from joy to misery. As long as 
man is in a condition of selfishness he will be overcome 
by influences which he knows to be selfish. The selfish 
feelings are left by relinquishing selfish attachments. If 
man does not love, he only relinquishes one selfish 
attachment that he may know another. Man grieves 
and rejoices over the loss and the obtaining of the objects 
of selfish attachments ; but if he loves and has faith in 
love, all the changes of life are a manifestation of love. 
Every thing that man does should be an act of love; 
and every thing that takes place a manifestation of love. 


256 


GOD OF HEAVEN. 


ARTICLE XL. 

THE GOD OF HEAVEN. 

If a righteous man dies will he go to heaven ? 
Would the angels shriek if a bomb should burst among 
them ? 

When a man dies will he be as the angels ? Can 
departed beings see the bones of the dead ? 

When hypocrites pray do angels weep ? Does any 
one scream if they meet a snake ? 

Is heaven a place of rest for the overburdened of this 
world ? Can any one fire balls into Paradise ? 

Do the pure sigh when a man takes the name of God 
in vain ? Will gunpowder blow up the New 
Jerusalem ? 

Do the righteous weep over fallen humanity ? Can 
any one set fire to heaven ? 

Do the righteous despise the doers of iniquity ? Do 
all the flowers in heaven grow on thornless bushes ? 

Would it disturb the happiness of the angels to see 
men in misery ? Is heaven guarded by artillery ? 

If by heaven is meant any locality or condition in 
which man shall be released from any of the evils inci¬ 
dent to this life, it is an act of selfishness to seek it. It 
is the selfishness of man that has located heaven and 
its joy away from the present moments of his existence. 
It is his dislikes and hatreds that cause him to wish to 
leave his present condition. Is it more selfish in the 
inebriate to seek his drink than for one to make sacri¬ 
fices to go to a local heaven ? Is it more selfish in man 
to seek for wealth than to seek for a house not made 


GOD OF LABOR. 


257 


with hands ? Is it more selfish in man to seek for ease 
than to seek to walk the streets of the New Jerusalem ? 
Is it more selfish in man to seek the pleasures of indul¬ 
gence than to seek to inhale the fragrance of flowers in 
Paradise? Would it not be better for man to seek his 
heaven among the bones of the dead, the cries of the 
miserable, the distress of the starving, the bloated coun¬ 
tenance of the inebriate, the curses of harlots, the 
resting places of the languishing, the neglected infants ? 
Why should not man locate his heaven among them, and 
learn to toil continually amidst their imprecations with¬ 
out fainting, — learn how to love and how to be free ? 
Who shall seek to escape any of the evils of life that fall 
about his pathway ? What toil among the degraded 
will man shun and find freedom? Will man despise 
the profane swearer and find freedom ? Will man re¬ 
fuse to sit beside harlots and find freedom ? Will man 
leave the houses of the indigent poor and find freedom ? 
Will man seek to hear the angelic choir and find free¬ 
dom ? Has man discovered that God has his favorite 
places and conditions, and his favorite men and 
women ? 


ARTICLE X LI. 

THE GOD OF LABOR. 

Man should seek to know every one as his brother, 
and be ready to assist all in all kinds of toil in which 
they can be engaged; in this way he can work, and 
joy be with him in every endeavor. Man may not be 


2*2* 


258 


GOD OF LABOR. 




called on to perform all labor known among men be¬ 
fore he can labor in joy ; but that kind of labor he dis¬ 
likes he must learn to see joy in, or he must remain in 
a condition of selfishness. 

Man is not free unless he can assist one in one kind 
of toil as well as one in another ; and because one kind 
of labor is preferable to another, is because of selfish 
loves. 

Man should not have an aversion to any of the 
methods of toil among the oppressed, for it may take 
him long to find joy in doing the same things. He 
should not seek to assign any kind of labor to any class 
of persons and think that others should not perform the 
same ; and he should not think himself unfit to per¬ 
form any kind of labor known among men ; and he 
should never give any superiority to one kind of labor 
over another. 

If man thinks any labor performed by women would 
be degrading for him to do, or w r ould deny to women 
any of the privileges he enjoys, it is on account of his 
selfish desires. All kinds of labor belong to man and 
to woman. There is no kind of labor that woman 
should do in preference to man because she is woman ; 
and there is no kind of labor that man should do in 
preference to woman because he is man. If man shall 
think that woman has the requisite qualities to do cer¬ 
tain kinds of labor more than himself, he has those quali¬ 
ties to learn before he can be free. If woman shall think 
that certain kinds of labor belong to man, she has this 
feeling to overcome before she can find liberty. Differ¬ 
ent individuals may be adapted to do different kinds of 
labor ; but whoever thinks any kind of labor known 




GOD OF LABOR. 


259 


among men, does not belong to him on account of con¬ 
dition, must overcome this feeling before he can be free ; 
for the free can go to all in every condition of life. 

Every condition of toil is a condition in which strength 
must be gained; and if there is any toil that any being 
would not perform, it becomes necessary for him to per¬ 
form the same before he can have strength to love; 
therefore, every condition of labor in which strength is 
to be gained, belongs to all beings. 

If there is a being that man does not love he is not 
free, and his joy must be dependent on conditions. 
Hence, if there is any kind of labor known that he 
despises he can not be free ; because he might be called 
on from his love to assist in performing the labor he 
despises, which would annoy him. Hence, man can not 
be free if he has an attachment for one kind of labor in 
preference to another. 

It should not be supposed, because man and woman 
are each contented in the conditions of life assigned 
them now, that their condition is freedom. Whatever 
condition any being is in now, that condition must soon 
change ; therefore, if one being is happy in one condi¬ 
tion and would be unhappy in all others, that being 
must be soon unhappy, for changes must constantly take 
place with every one. Things are not as men selfishly 
desire them, but as the infinity of action causes them to 
be ; and all should see joy in this action. 

Man can only see joy in all the changes that take 
place, except he is ready to perform any kind of labor 
that he may be called on to do; bat if he forms an 
attachment to one kind of labor in preference to another, 
or would deny to any class of people any privileges, he 


260 


DESPISED GOD. 


can not see joy; for the changes of life may conflict 
with his selfish desires. 

Man should not become attached to any method of 
doing any thing on account of the sanction of society; 
for he may not only be called on to perform all kinds 
of labor, but he may be called on to do that labor in 
all methods possible for it to be performed. Society 
might prescribe the manner in which a thing should be 
done ; and if man would form any attachment to this 
manner, or think it essential, the changes with which 
he must constantly meet will annoy him. There are an 
infinite variety of ways in which any thing can be done; 
and man ought not to form an attachment to one 
method and say it is superior to all others. Every 
attachment formed in this way is selfish, and must be 
overcome, for it prevents love. Man should always 
seek to perform labor in the best manner ; but he should 
be free, so that he can perform it in any way and not be 
annoyed. 


ARTICLE X L11. 

THE DESPISED GOD. 

Ought the man with worn garments be noticed in the 
street ? 

Ought the harlot to meet with angry countenances ? 
Ought the gambler be pointed out to children to be 
avoided ? 

Do the virtuous run from a prisoner ? 

Shall the felon be told that he is despised ? 


GOD OF CONDITIONS. 


261 


Shall those who commit faults be shunned ? 

Shall the hypocrite be told that his sins are past 
forgiveness ? 

Ought the proud to be left without hope ? 

Shall the fanatic be told that he is ruining the cause 
of truth ? 

Shall the bigot never hear the words of love ? 

Who are the despised ? Can man pass a being he 
does not love ? Shall man call by hard names his 
brothers ? Can he help the drunkard home as often as he 
shall fall in the street ? Should harlots meet with those 
who love ? Can the people wash the feet of bigots and 
traitors ? Can the fanatic be led with tender hand ? 
Shall the prisoner see in the love of others his own joy ? 
Shall the proud be sought by the lowly? Shall man be 
free from anger or impatience when some one has sinned ? 
Ought the strong in toil to come? Shall man labor 
among the outcasts continually and faint not ? Shall 
man learn to love and to do acts of love ? Man should 
not judge his brother, but help to relieve all from the 
burdens their own acts have seemingly imposed upon 
them. 


ARTICLE XLJII. 

THE GOD OF CONDITIONS. 

Ought a man desire to live in a showy house ? Ought 
eagles build their eyries on the mountains ? 

Ought a man desire to be praised ? Ought a man to 
love the glory of the world ? 


262 GOD OF CONDITIONS. 

Ought a man desire to be respected ? When did God 
commence to distinguish among the classes of men ? 

Ought a man desire to be called one of the learned ? 
How long is man in educating himself ? 

Ought a man desire to be president ? What should 
be the shape of a dwelling house ? 

Ought a man desire to be a famous orator ? Who will 
hear the orators ? 

Ought a man desire to be senator ? Who will speak 
to the harlots? 

Ought a man seek to travel ? Who will take care of 
the sick ? 

Ought a man seek to be cheered in assemblies ? Who 
will cheer ? 

Ought one seek to ride in an elegant carriage ? 
Who ought to till the soil ? 

Ought any one seek to make laws for his country ? 
Who ought to dig the coal from the earth ? 

Ought any one seek to be master of a vessel ? Who 
ought to be helmsmen on canal boats ? 

Ought any one seek to marry into a wealthy family ? 
Ought the poor to be married ? 

Ought any one seek to marry a good house-keeper ? 
Ought those who learn music never to be married ? 

Ought the poor desire to be rich ? Ought the rich 
desire to be poor ? 

Ought a harlot desire to be respected ? Ought any 
one desire to be a harlot ? 

Ought a man seek to be a professor ? Who ought 
to teach common schools ? 

Ought a man seek to live in the country ? Who 
ought to live in the city ? 


TEACHING GOD. 


263 


Ought a man seek to be ambassador at a foreign court? 
Who ought to build the fires in palaces ? 

Ought a man seek to dress in a fashionable manner ? 
Who ought to make fashionable clothes ? 

Man cannot say that any condition in which he may 
be placed is superior to another, except through a selfish 
attachment. Can man say that his condition is superior, 
or that he is more cared for than the most degraded ? 
Can man sit beside a harlot and say that he is more 
loved, or that his condition of selfishness is superior to 
that of hers ? Can man lead a drunkard home, and say 
that he is preferred before the drunkard ? Can man 
speak kindly to all of every name and say that he is pre¬ 
ferred before them ? 


ARTICLE XLIV. 

' THE TEACHING GOD? 

If a man murders another ought he to be hung ? 
Ought a medical college to have dead bodies ? 

Ought the righteous to sigh if they hear the name of 
God taken in vain ? Ought one man to cheat another ? 

Ought the pure to weep if the Sabbath is broken ? 
Ought eggs to be used for pies ? 

Ought a harlot be told that her course is wrong ? 
Ought horses be told that they will love oats ? 

Ought a drunkard be told that he is wicked ? Ought 
a hare be told to fly from dogs ? 

Ought the world be told that they are sinners ? 
What righteous man discovered the w^orld in sin ? 



264 


TEACHING GOD. 


Ought any one be told that he is ruining the cause of 
religion ? Who discovered religion ? 

Ought a man be told to join the church ? Ought a 
man to live on vegetables ? 

Ought man try to convert others to God ? In what 
period of time was God discovered ? 

Ought a man tell others that the wicked shall go to 
hell ? Has any one seen the New Jerusalem ? 

Man teaches in a selfish manner when he teaches from 
a love of conditions. He should not suppose his selfish¬ 
ness is better than that of another, or that any of his 
selfish acts are superior in their results to any of the 
selfish acts of others. Man can not teach any one from 
his love when he supposes what he teaches is superior 
to what any one else teaches, or that he is himself supe¬ 
rior to his pupil. The end of teaching should be for 
love. Man should only give his conceptions as an act 
of love, and this should be the only aim of his teaching ; 
for the perceptions of truth that every person has are 
different. It is an act of selfishness in man to say to% 
the drunkard, harlot, or libertine, that their course is 
wrong ; for in doing this he assumes to them that he is 
their superior. He who would call sinners to come 
and repent has assumed a superior condition. He who 
would call to others to join his church has assumed a 
superior condition. He who would tell others to believe 
as himself, sees the elected and the cast off. Beliefs, in 
themselves, are of no consequence ; for how much does 
any finite being know of truth and infinity ? Among 
those who are trying to teach others to love, there can 
never be any difficulty about opinions, for they only 
assume importance through selfish attachments. 


GOD OF EVIL. 


265 


If the harlot, drunkard, and libertine are sick, who 
shall carry them medicine ; if in trouble, who shall visit 
them ; if in danger of starvation, whoosh all carry them 
food ? But man does not teach them by supposing him¬ 
self superior, but by supposing they are equal to himself. 
To teach them that their condition is inferior to that of 
others, or that they have lost a position in society to 
which they ought to attain, is only teaching a new selfish 
love. To take them from their associates and teach them 
to despise, is it doing them good ? Man can teach from 
his love when he knows all as equal to himself, and the 
selfish acts of others as no worse than his own. He can 
then help and do acts of kindness to all; he then can 
visit and associate’among all, — giving advice and render¬ 
ing assistance. No one should refrain to speak with the 
« uarlot, libertine, or drunkard; not to tell them how 
wicked they are, but to let them know that they are 
loved. Let them receive acts of kindness, — not from 
those of lofty conditions, but from their brothers and 
sisters who are not superior to themselves. 


ARTICLE XLV. 

THE GOD OF EVIL. 

Did Satan introduce evil into the world ? Does God 
keep still when Satan is at work ? 

Did the Jews crucify Christ ? What was the cause of 
Judas Iscariot’s death ? 

Was Christ a man of sorrows ? Ought God to have 
said that he was well pleased with Christ ? 


23 


266 


GOD OF EVIL. 


Was Christ tempted by the devil ? Does God prefer 
to be worshipped in preference to others ? 

Ought man to be annoyed if his house should be 
burned ? Ought a man to laugh if he suddenly becomes 
rich ? 

Ought a man be annoyed if his horse is stolen ? 
Ought a man praise God if the people make him 
presents ? 

Ought a man weep if he should beg in the street ? 
Ought kittens to play with mice ? 

Ought a man pray to go to heaven ? Ought 
Indians refuse to be civilized ? 

Man should not suppose that any one event more 
than another has done more towards producing any 
effects which he likes or dislikes, or will be more 

i- 

beneficent in its results. It is impossible for man to 
show that any one being in the universe is doing more 
evil or good than another. Nations may declare war, 
take reprisals for the vindication of rights or to relieve 
the oppressed; they can not show that the acts which 
cause their grievances are any less a production of good 
than evil. Man may spend his life in grieving over the 
wrongs of the oppressed and over the usurpations of 
the oppressor ; but he can not show that any thing has 
taken place different from what it should, or that any 
of the wrongs or usurpations over which he grieves are 
not as much a manifestation of love as any of his own 
acts. Man can not show that what his enemies do 
are less productive of good or evil than his own acts, 
or less a manifestation of love, or less necessary in the 
infinity of causes and effects. 


GOD OF ANGER, ETC. 


267 


ARTICLE X L VI. 

THE GOD OF ANGER. 

Does God become angry with his people ? Does 
God froth at the mouth? 

Ought man to be angry if his apples are stolen ? 
Ought man to become angry if the wind blows his fence 
down ? 

Ought man to be angry if he is charged a dollar for 
an article that is worth a shilling ? . Ought man to be 
angry if he strikes his foot against a stone ? 

Man can find no cause for anger in one action of 
infinity more than in another. He has no more cause 
for anger when his neighbor does him an injury than 
if it came from the wind. The effect arises from the 
infinity of causes in one instance as much as in the 
other. 


ARTICLE XLYII. 

THE GOD OF REFORM, OR PROGRESSION. 

Is the world advancing in truth and knowledge ? 
Will a steam mill smooth boards faster than a jack 
plane ? 

Has any one been discovered to be behind the age ? 
Ought floor boards to be planed on both sides ? 

Has any one been discovered in advance of the age ? 
Ought game-cocks to mount high places to crow ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to woman ? 
Ought cats to cry out in the night ? 





268 


GOD OF REFORM, ETC. 


Does the reformation of the world belong to scientific 
men ? How much does it cost to cut creases in boards ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to preach¬ 
ers ? When is a colt fit for labor ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to states¬ 
men ? Can a statesman define his position ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to those 
who believe in three Gods ? Ought God, Christ, and 
the devil to quarrel ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to those 
who believe in one God ? Does God love those who 
understand him ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to those 
who study nature ? How many revelations to man can 
nature make ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to those 
who buy and sell slaves ? Is gold and silver a means 
to heavenly mansions ? 

Does the reformation of the world belong to those 
who circulate tracts ? Are red blankets the only things 
that provoke cattle ? 

✓ Does the reformation of the world belong to those 

who talk with the dead ? How near to God is a man 
that goes out of town ? 

Has any one received a prophecy that he shall be a 
great reformer? How much does it cost to have 
pamphlets and books printed ? 

Will any spend their lives in reforming the world 
through spirit agency ? Who will give the names of 
reformers to posterity ? 

Ought a reformer to be a wise man ? What kind of 
animals do the most labor ? 


{ 


GOD OF REFORM, ETC. 


269 


Ought a reformer to be a learned man ? How much 
planing should be done to obtain a smooth edge on a 
board ? 

Ought a reformer to be a professor in college ? 
What angle ought two persons to make in approaching 
each other ? 

Will the world be reformed when all men are born 
right ? Do rabbits conform to nature ? 

Will the world be reformed when all men obey the 
divine laws ? Ought pine timber to be free from knots ? 

Will the world be reformed when all men obey the 
laws of their being ? If man is injured ought he or the 
earth be destroyed ? 

Will the world be reformed when all men live in 
harmony ? Ought cats to sing over their young ? 

Will the world be reformed when man’s social nature 
is understood ? Did infinite action commence four 
thousand years ago ? 

Will the world be reformed when society is correctly 
organized ? In what kind of a harness do horses work 
the best ? 

Will the world be reformed when all men praise 
God ? Does God prefer church music to thunder ? 

Will the world be reformed when woman assumes her 
proper sphere ? How many feet high ought a horse 
to be ? 

Will the world be reformed when all who have not 
disciplined their minds by study cease writing ? How 
far towards the source of a stream ought a man go to 
make the water muddy ? 

Will the world be reformed when all love each other ? 
Is kissing a test of love ? 

2S* 


270 GOD OF REFORM, ETC. 

If a man leaves one church and joins another, is he 
progressing ? How high can crickets jump ? 

If a man believes that God will save all men, is he pro¬ 
gressing ? At what place should a rope be the strongest ? 

If a man believes that he can talk with departed 
beings, is he progressing ? Is a man deprived of asso¬ 
ciation in this world ? 

Is it dangerous to attack any belief ? How many dogs 
ought to attack another ? 

Is a man progressing if he has left fogy isms ? Does 
God show himself in the cool of the evening ? 

Is man progressing if he has found the harmonial 
philosophy ? Ought thorns to annoy any one ? 

Is man progressing if he reads the Bible ? How long 
ought a hound to be in overtaking a hare ? 

Is a man progressing if he conforms to nature ? Is 
it natural for foxes to dig holes in the earth ? 

Is a man progressing if he argues down all his 
opponents ? How much noise will be made if a hen 
commences to cackle ? 

Is man progressing if he notices every thing that is 
said of his belief ? If a dog growls how many ought 
to flog it ? 

Is man progressing if he thinks his belief superior to 
that of all others ? How much wealth ought a man to 
possess ? 

Is man progressing if he thinks the world foolish for 
not believing as himself ? Can man go within a few 
miles of where God lives ? 

Is man progressing if he attempts to excite dislike 
towards any person ? Ought it to rain if women go out 
to walk ? 


GOD OF REFORM, ETC. 271 

Is man progressing if he speaks of any belief in a 
satirical manner ? On what terms are pupils taught the 
broad sword exercise ? 

Is a man progressing if he joins the church ? Can 
a carpenter pound his hand if he is building a church ? 

Is a man progressing if he is turned out of church ? 
Will the same stream of water do for two saw mills ? 

Is a man progressing if he sees departed beings ? 
Ought some animals be capable of living in the water 
and on land ? 

Is a man progressing if he has talked with the famous 
dead ? Do men understand each other near a waterfall '! 

If a man goes to the future world is he progressing ? 
Ought any one to give an account of his life among the 
Indians ? 

Has any one fallen from grace ? Ought thistles to 
grow in the high way ? 

Has any one progressed to the highest sphere ? Ought 
boys to wish themselves twenty-one years old ? 

Has any one gone into the higher life ? What 
birds fly the highest ? 

Has any one died and gone to the angels ? Ought 
emigration to be encouraged ? 

Do the angels hover about man to do him good ? 
Ought the people of this world to speak to each other ? 

Do the dead watch over man ? Ought servants to be 
hired to nurse infants ? 

Do the angels direct man in all the affairs of life ? 
Who teach pigs to drink sour milk ? 

Is it beautiful to commune with the angels ? How 
much does it cost to support poor-houses ? 

Is it comforting to the mourner to learn that the 


272 GOD OF REFORM, ETC. 

dead can come back ? Are the departed without any 
thing to do ? 

Has any one discovered the idea of the present age ? 
Ought hogs to root up the earth ? 

Is the present age a time of wonder ? When did 
smoke commence to rise ? 

Has any one shown any progressive tendencies ? 
Ought streams of water to descend into the valleys ? 

If is meant by progression that one man has a 
superior belief or more truth than another, or will ever 
be in a superior condition to that in which he is now 
placed, it is an act of selfishness to teach or wish for it. 
What finite being can judge infinity and say his belief 
is the best ? No one can do this without being selfish. 
What man can prove to the world that his belief is the 
truth ? Is man progressing when he has discovered 
some thing new ; or does he form a new selfish attach¬ 
ment for which he is willing to contend and fight ? Is 
it progression when man discovers that the dead 
can talk with him ? Is it progression when man dis¬ 
covers that God does not punish? If one man’s belief 
is superior to another, then infinite action is partial. 
Man should only judge for himself what he should 
believe in each moment of time. When he asserts that 
another should believe as himself, it is the same as 
asserting that his own belief is false ; for if man should 
not believe what he does in one moment of time, he 
should never believe any thing in any moment of time; 
for no finite being can ever have any proof of truth 
except from his present conceptions. * To be free is to 
love ; but man can not prove that those who have found 
liberty are in a superior condition to those in bondage ; 


GOD OF REFORM, 


ETC. 


273 


for every event in all periods of time make up the life 
of man, and he is not dependent on one thing more 
than another; not dependent on what takes place in the 
present moment any more than on the evil and good of 
the past and future, that ever has or will take place in 
the universe. If one moment in time is superior to 
another the joys of the free are dependent, and the 
definite workings of infinity become traceable to the 
finite. It is selfish in man to suppose that his present 
belief or condition is superior to any belief or condition 
in the past which he can remember. Whoever despises 
what he believed in the past, is not likely to have so 
satisfactory a belief in the present. Man should recall 
to his mind his past beliefs and changes, and discover to 
his consciousness the motives that led to them ; and 
often times he may find that the same selfish feelings 
that influenced him then are influencing him now. 
But if he looks back upon those moments as to be 
driven from his memory, and as unsanctified periods in 
his life, does he not miss of the helps by which he may 
learn to love ? How shall man love and be free ? Will 
he exalt his God, his belief, his conception of truth, or 
one moment in time ? Man must not despise that 
moment in time in which he has been selfish ; for in 
consequence of that moment he discovered his selfish 
feelings. Man should learn to look on all the moments 
of belief, and of despised conditions in his own life and 
that of others, as equal to his present condition and 
belief, and as equally ordained. 

If a man believes in progression or reform he must 
prefer moments in time. He must ever consider his 
present condition in any time or locality, inferipr to 


274 


GOD OF REFORM, ETC. 


what it shall be in the future ; must ever consider his 
love, faith, and joy in any time and locality inferior to 
what it shall be in the future ; must ever consider him¬ 
self to be in any given time and -locality, inferior to 
what he shall be in the future ; all of which he has no 
means of proving except through his selfish feelings. 

Man views his standard of perfection by which he 
judges a reform is going on, as he views all other things 
for which he has a selfish attachment. Man has no 
means of demonstrating that liberty is better than 
bondage, or love better than hatred ; he can only de¬ 
termine which he will possess for himself. There is no 
method of proving that the man who hates is less a 
necessary cause in infinite action than the man who 
makes every act one of love. Liberty is only better 
than bondage to the person who sees in it his joy. 
Love is only better than hatred to the person who 
is determined constantly to do acts of love. It 
can be demonstrated that love will produce liberty, 
and that any other motive to action will pro¬ 
duce bondage; but it can not be demonstrated 
that the free will find a superior condition. The 
bond and the free do what they think will bring to them 
joy. There is no more credit in an act of love than of 
hatred; there is no more credit in being free than being 
in bondage. Man may do every thing as acts of love, — 
be free from selfish attachments, he is seeking his joy 
the same as one who is a slave to appetite. When man 
says the world is in need of reformation oris reforming, 
he is proclaiming some standard for which he has a 
selfish attachment, and which he has no means of prov¬ 
ing to be superior to judge from than the standard of any 


GOD OF PRAISE. 


275 


other person. Man may live a million of years he can 
not prove that his standard is any more perfect to judge 
whether the world is reforming or progressing than if 
he had known life but a short time. 


ARTICLE XL Y 111. 

THE GOD OF PRAISE. 

Is God exalted above the nations ? Has God been 
brought up right ? 

Is God the supreme Being of the universe? Was 
God born right ? 

Is God the great Sovereign of the world ? Is God 
acquainted with political economy ? 

Is God a benevolent being ? How far can a cat carry 
a kitten in its mouth ? 

Is God omnipotent ? Will storms at sea break vessels 
to pieces ? 

Is God omnipresent ? How far can a man see with a 
telescope ? 

Is God a being of love ? Is God acquainted with the 
latest works on harmony ? 

Is nature the work of God ? Does nature include 
hugs, fleas, and thistles ? 

Is God a being of mercy ? Does God know how to 
take care of infants? 

Did God love the world sufficiently to send Christ to 
save it ? Is God a professor in the science of boxing ? 

Has God overcome the devil ? Has God been 
educated at a military school ? 



276 


GOD OF PRAISE. 


Will God enable man to overcome evil ? Does God 
do every thing believing it to be joy ? 

Does God send the Holy Spirit to importune with man ? 
Was the Holy Spirit educated in a female seminary ? 

Is Jesus Christ God’s anointed ? Will oil keep bugs 
from plants ? 

Is God the great source of light ? Ought owls to 
praise God ? 

Has any one discovered a sound and erudite theolo¬ 
gian ? Do all sounds that the people can not interpret 
come from God ? 

i Has any one discovered the master-spirit of the age ? 
Can the cackling of geese save a city ? 

Has any one discovered a great orator ? What is the 
price of the best seats in a menagerie ? 

Has any one discovered a great statesman ? How 
strong can be the selfish attachment of any person ? 

Is any one remarkable for personal beauty ? What 
color ought a house to be painted ? 

Is any person remarkable for his pleasing address ? 
At what age do calves leave off playing ? 

Has any one won the admiration of all hearts by 
wonderful gifts ? Ought children to laugh at the antics 
of kittens ? 

Has any public speaker a superior discrimination in 
discovering the wants of the people ? Do the people 
like to hear about heavenly mansions ? 

Has any public speaker a happy method of claiming 
the attention of an audience ? How long will a cat 
watch at a hole ? 

Has any public speaker made a masterly effort ? How 
far can a boy jump ? 


GOD OF PRAISE. 


27 7 




Is any one capable of writing in a cool and logical 
manner ? Ought cows to stand in the shade and chew ? \ 

Can any one make happy quotations from the classics 
and poets ? Is not a trapper a recondite and elegant 
scholar ? 

Has any one written an article that can not be answered ? 
How long ought a cat lay in ambush ? 

Has any one written an article that no one dare 
answer ? What animal can fight in the most scientific 
manner ? 

Is any one noted for his amiable piety ? When was 
God converted ? 

Did any one ever die singing praises to God ? Where 
does God live ? 

Is religion a beautiful thing to die with ? Is gold for 
this world, and Christ for the future ? 

Are those societies noble and generous that make 
large donations to their preachers ? Are dogs fond of 
butchers ? 

Ought men to avoid the devil ? Can any being be¬ 
come so degraded as to be beneath human notice ? 

Every act of praise or commendation is an act of 
selfishness. No one can bestow praise, except he pre¬ 
sume to judge from some standard that is different in 
every individual. Every act of praise is with reference 
to superior and inferior conditions. When man bestows 
praise on any person, it is at the expense of all his bro¬ 
thers and sisters who hear it. Praise arises through a 
love of conditions, — through a selfish attachment to 
positions in society, — through the desire of fame, 
wealth, or respectability. 


24 


218 


INFERIOR GOD. 


ARTICLE X LIX . 

THE INFERIOR GOD. 

Is the devil inferior to Christ ? Does the devil and 
God want worshippers ? 

Has any one written a book devoid of literary merit ? 
How much do puffs in newspapers cost ? 

Has any one delivered an elaborate discourse and 
misappreciated his audience ? How soon after learning 
a new word does a man wish to use it ? 

Is the God of the Jews superior to all other Gods ? 
Are Gods judged by the scale of equal parts ? 

Is nature man’s only true teacher ? Which does the 
most talking, man or the trees ? 

Has any one written a book in which truth is mis¬ 
represented ? Why do foxes run in a circle ? 

Has man written an article against the reputation of 
another ? When a man is tired does he feel that earth 
is not his home ? 

Has man cast reflections on the good moral standing 
of another ? Ought dogs to make a noise when they 
are wounded ? 

Has man poured out his wrath against any class of 
believers ? Ought beavers to watch at the mouth of 
their holes ? 

Ought a weekly report to be made of quacks and pre¬ 
tenders ? Are monkeys good at dividing cheese ? 

Ought young and ardent minds to be criticised ? 
From what round of a ladder ought a man to fall ? 

No one can speak disparagingly of another except 
through selfish preferences ? 


GOD OF REPUTATION. 


279 


ARTICLE L. 

THE GOD OF REPUTATION. 

What ought a man to do to be respectable? How 
much training is necessary to make a good saddle horse ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he praises females ? 
Do women grow wise from flattery ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he tells of the 
durability of woman’s affections ? Ought women to 
seek for rich and handsome husbands ? 

Will a mail’s reputation be good if he conforms to 
the best rules of etiquette ? How long are monkeys in 
learning to dance ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he has been to a 
foreign country ? How far can a hound run in a day ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he is wealthy ? 
Are hogs fond of acorns ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he can make a 
speech ? Why do dogs bark ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he wears fashion¬ 
able clothes ? Ought the leaves of trees to be green ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he seeks the best 
society ? Is the soil in mountainous districts the best ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he seeks to be 
with the influential? Does the wind often blow down 
the tallest trees ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he looks after his 
honor ? Can a man’s honor be packed in a sheet of paper ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he writes a novel ? 
Ought starving children in novels to call on the God of 
the fatherless ? 


280 


GOD OF REPUTATION. 


Will a man’s reputation be good if he writes poetry ? 
From what book ought man to chant the praises of God? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he fights for his 
country ? Does God wish all fighting done in his name ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he addresses ladies 
in polite language ? Ought it to be said that Christ is 
the only begotten son of God ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he is senator ? 
Ought squirrels to run up tall trees ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he is a preacher ? 
Does God ever receive any petitions about withholding 
his sanctifications ? 

Will a man’s reputation be good if he joins a church ? 
Does God’s wind ever blow churches down ? 

If man has lost his reputation can he ever regain it ? 
If the Holy Ghost is once away from man can it return ? 

Did Judas Iscariot lose his reputation ? Has any one 
given up seeking for gold ? 

Has any one stolen goods and lost his reputation ? 
Where ought a man to spend the season after he has 
gained a law suit ? 

Has any one spoken unwisely and lost his reputation ? 
Would the world be less selfish if all should agree to 
steal from each other ? 

Has any one lost his property and lost his reputation ? 
Ought rich Mrlots to be denied the privilege of owning 
pews in churches ? 

Has any one become involved and lost his reputation ? 
For what purpose are emetics given ? 

Are harlots without reputation ? Ought not harlots 
to be invited to the Lord’s supper ? 


GOD OF REPUTATION. 


281 


Are convicts without reputation ? Can the devil act 
as jailor for God ? 

Are the filthy without reputation ? Ought not 
preachers to immerse the unclean ? 

Are the drunkards without reputation ? What is the 
signification of redemption ? 

Any standard that can be adopted by which to decide 
that one’s reputation is good or bad, is selfish. Man has 
no means of proving that any one act of selfishness is 
superior to another. The free can not prove that their 
condition is superior to those in bondage, or that they 
are doing more good. One who declares that another has 
lost his reputation, declares that he is himself in a supe¬ 
rior condition. It is always the selfish feelings in man 
that cause him to pass judgment on his brothers and 
sisters. Is it any more selfish to seek indulgence in 
marriage than to seek it in houses of ill fame? Is it 
any more selfish to steal the property of another than 
to use deception in the buying and selling of merchan¬ 
dise ? Is it more selfish to seek one agreeable sensation 
than another ? Is it more selfish to seek the pleasures 
of narcotics than to seek to hear angelic choirs ? Is it 
more selfish to anticipate joys in a house of ill fame than 
to anticipate them in the New Jerusalem ? Is it more 
selfish to anticipate joys from strong drinks than to 
anticipate them from the marriage covenant? No 
credit or blame can be attached to any action, for every 
one is seeking his joy'; and no one has any means of 
proving that the channel through which his selfish feel¬ 
ings run is superior to that of any other being, except 
through selfish preferences. 


24* 


282 


GOD OF EDUCATION. 


ARTICLE LI. 

THE GOD OF EDUCATION. 

When ought a man to be educated ? 

Where are the great seats of learning ? 

Where are the time-honored institutions ? 

How shall man be able to express himself in an 
elegant manner ? 

How shall a man be able to use the best illustrations 
and metaphors ? 

Ought a man to tell how the sea can become dry ? 

Ought a man to give descriptions of clouds ? 

Ought a man write a book to say whether a river 
runs in a straight or a meandering course ? 

How many pages ought to be devoted in telling what 
individuals were married ? 

How long ought it take a man to tell who he wants 
for governor ? 

How many ought to read the description of a water- 
bucket in poetry ? 

Is it possible for a man to say who is educated ? If 
one man says he will do a thing, because he feels that 
it is right, can all the poetry, sermons, and speeches, 
— can all the splendid illustrations and metaphors 
that were ever printed or used, add or take away from 
the simple expression of his determination ? Has a man 
learned any thing when he discovers that he should be 
three hours in saying what he could previously express 
in a few moments ? Is a man educated when he learns 
a new method of expressing his ideas ? If man can 
convey by gesture that a house was blown down, is 




GOD OF EDUCATION. 


283 


there any method of proving that the language is 
inferior to the most splendid imagery ? Take away 
the imagery, the syntactical combination, the forced 
details from the imagination to make up compositions, 
and what do the institutions of learning do ? Is a man 
reading a learned work when he is obliged often to 
consult a lexicon ? Has a man unrivalled powers of 
description if he can use choice words, finished sen¬ 
tences, conform to established rules, and occupy a page 
in telling how the wind blew a tree down ? Is a man’s 
education superior that can tell how armies thrust bay¬ 
onets at each other, to that of a child who can not talk, 
that by gesture can tell how two dogs growled and bit 
each other ? Is the rhythm and imagery in poetry and 
the elegant diction in prose used to attract the attention 
and curiosity ? The same curiosity that attracts boys to 
see monkeys in red skirts attract people to the sounds 
and artistic construction of sentences in poetry and 
prose. No one kind of curiosity can be demonstrated 
to be superior to another, except through selfish prefer¬ 
ences. There is no method of demonstrating that a 
petition sent into a legislature is any more proof of 
education, than is the action of a cat in rubbing its head 
against chairs that it may obtain something to eat. 
There is no method of proving that the education of 
one being is superior to that of another, except through 
the selfish feelings. All standards by which people are 
judged to be educated are selfish and dependent. 


284 


DEPENDENT GOD. 


ARTICLE L11. 

THE DEPENDENT GOD. 

Ought man to feel dependent on God ? Ought 
horses to feel dependent on any one ? 

Ought man to say that in God he moves and has his 
existence? Ought great pains to be taken to have a 
good breed of infants ? 

Ought the poor to feel dependent on the rich ? Is 
there glory in becoming honestly rich and influential ? 

Ought the rich to feel dependent on the poor ? How 
long ought a man to wait for a horse if he is going a 
mile ? 

Ought a preacher to feel dependent on his society ? 
What would be the value of bread if man could eat it 
and never hunger again ? 

Ought a senator to feel dependent on his constituents ? 
Ought any one to be afraid to make baskets ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on the church ? 
What does it cost to get vessels insured ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on his property ? 
Ought crows to keep sentinels ? 

Ought governments to feel dependent on military 
organizations ? How long ought soldiers to be in 
loading military wagons ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on government for 
protection ? Do those who love legal protection pay 
the highest taxes ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on his neighbors for a 
living ? Are drowning men apt to be converted to 
God? 


DEPENDENT GOD. 


285 


Ought a man to feel dependent on a new organiza¬ 
tion of society ? How can a man discover that he has 
been cheated ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on God for his daily 
bread ? If cold water cost any thing would God be 
thanked for it ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on God for all that he 
calls his own ? Does God receive petitions about bugs 
and thistles ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on God for sparing 
his life ? Is death a greater calamity than a birth ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on Christ for salva¬ 
tion ? Do drowning men call on the dead to save them ? 

Ought a man to feel dependent on the Bible for 
heaven ? What anticipated joy is the most tantalizing ? 

Man has no means of proving that he is dependent on 
one thing more than another, because he can not show 
that any one thing is more a cause to any thing that 
he likes or dislikes than another. It is as selfish in the 
poor to feel dependent on the rich as to feel dependent 
on an imaginary being they call God. Every feeling of 
dependence is exercised with reference to some antici¬ 
pated joy or dreaded evil. Man calls upon those whom 
he believes can render to him the most assistance in 
obtaining what he selfishly loves, and on them he will 
feel dependent. If man feels that God can give him 
what he wishes, he will feel dependent on God; if he 
feels that the rich can give him what he wishes, he will 
feel dependent on the rich. Any one act of dependence 
can not be proved to be superior to another. Does man 
gain any thing by removing his feelings of dependence 
from all earthly objects to his God ? It is as selfish in 


286 


GOD OF MUSIC. 


man to depend on God for an eternal home as on a rich 
man for a bushel of corn. Every feeling of dependence 
arises in consequence of a love of conditions. To say 
that man is dependent on any one thing or being, is the 
same as saying that he is dependent on every thing, 
because one thing can not be shown to be more a cause 
to infinite action than another; and to say that man is 
dependent on every thing is the same as saying that he 
is not dependent on any thing ; for to be dependent on 
all things and on nothing is the same relative condition. 


ARTICLE L111. 

THE GOD OF MUSIC. 

Is music divine ? Do angels beat drums to drown the 
cries of the dying ? 

Does God love praise through the organ and choir ? 
Has God any prejudices against jews-harps and ^whistling 
boys ? 

Does God love the solemn music ? Ought canary 
birds try to excel a music box ? 

Are hymns and psalms the true method of chanting 
praises to God ? Does God stop his ears when a lively 
tune is played ! 

Do Christians devoutly sing to God ? Who discov¬ 
ered that God preferred hymns to the music of standing 
armies ? 

Is any kind of psalm singing acceptable to God ? Has 
God a good ear for music ? 



GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


287 


Does the music of angels please God better than that 
of man ? Does God like to have saws filed ? 

Will it be beautiful to hear the angelic choir ? Do 
angels keep away from saw mills ? 

Do the sons of God give out harmonious strains ? 
What ought children be called when they cry ? 

Has any one heard enrapturing strains ? What ought 
to be done with infants when they commence to cry ? 

Has any one been in a transport of joy from heavenly 
music ? Do cats cry at night because they are lonesome ? 

There is no method by which one sound can be called 
superior to another, except through the selfish feelings. 
There is no method by which church music or hymns 
can be proved to be superior to any music or songs that 
were ever composed, except through the selfish feelings. 
There is no method by which singing hymns to please God 
can be proved to be superior to the singing of songs to 
please any animal or being that ever lived, except through 
the selfish feelings. 


ARTICLE LIY. 

THE GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 

Do angels do the work of God ? Who are the 
bees at work for ? 

Are angels the direct messengers of God ? Who do 
the African race act as messengers for ? 

Are angels appointed by God to hover over man ? Is 
any one divinely appointed over wolves when they eat 
sheep ? 



288 GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 

Do all beings that men love become angels after death ? 
Ought people to dress in light clothes in the summer 
season ? 

Are there angel mothers in the future world ? "VVhat 
are those beings that are called mothers in this world ? 

Do angels watch over man during the hours of night ? 
Who watch over the sick in alms houses ? 

When a man dies does he go to his home among the 
angels ? Do foxes ever long to be at rest ? 

Has any one seen the angelic dress ? What kind of 
shoes are the most fashionable ? 

Has any one discovered angelic society ? How much 
ought a man be worth to obtain the highest position ? 

Will man be free from care when he is among the 
angels ? Ought harlots be called abandoned creatures ? 

Has there been a great spiritual manifestation ? What 
kind of a manifestation is produced by two dogs growl¬ 
ing at each other ? 

Do spirits guide man ? Ought six mules to be driven 
with one line ? 

Do spirits tell man ^vhat to believe ? How soon can 
a child learn that some one is better than itself ? 

Ought man to rely upon spirits for protection ? Did 
spirits lead Moses against the Canaanites ? 

Are most all men mediums for spirit impression ? Is 
God impressible when his earthly children hang them¬ 
selves ? 

Was Christ a superior medium ? Does a tree die more 
effectually when the branches wither ? 

Has any one discovered a superior seeing medium ? 
How long before cats can see when they are shut 
up in da rk rooms ? 




GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 289 

Has any one discovered a superior test medium ? 
Are sounds from a table better than those from a black¬ 
smith’s shop ? 

Has any one discovered a superior trance speaker ? 
Was Christ in a trance when he washed the disciples’ 
feet ? 

Is the world foolish for not believing in spirits ? 
How ought men to fight against the professors of 
learning ? 

Is spiritual intercourse the great basis of all reform ? 
Was God ever in a trance ? 

Can man have a direct communion with the noble 
dead ? Ought the wills of deceased persons be con¬ 
tested ? 

Does it fill up a void in the human heart to be told 
that the loved departed are in the vicinity ? Do men 
hang themselves on account of the loss of reputation ? 

Does spirit communion teach purity ? Do spirits tell 
of the joys of finding their mates ? 

Does spirit communion teach harmony ? Do spirits 
find new joys in every new sphere to which they go ? 

Does spirit communion teach progression ? Do 
evidences of progression consist in telling how dark 
the world is ? 

Does spirit communion teach a future higher life ? 
Ought mules to prefer shrubs to grown trees? 

Does spirit communion teach that woman’s affections 
are holy ? Will all mediums go to the highest sphere ? 

Are some mediums unable to see spirits below the 
fifth sphere ? Ought there to be any alms-houses for 
beggars ? 

Are some mediums unable to commune with 


25 


290 


GOD 


OF SPIRITUALISM. 


degraded spirits ? Who ought to visit those that are in 
bonds ? 

Are some mediums able to give superior tests ? 
What kind of weather is the best for corn ? 

Can some mediums command a higher price than 
others ? Is God a medium on whom all should depend ? 

Has the fact of mind-reading been demonstrated ? 
Do cats often know when they are about to be killed ? 

Have the odylic forces been demonstrated ? Can 
sufficient rain come from heaven to flood the earth ? 

Has the rapping been demonstrated ? Can man dis¬ 
cover a mysterious sound ? 

Have the extra mundane causes been demonstrated ? 
Can an Indian hang his powder-horn on the moon ? 

Ought spirits be cautious not to tell their names ? 
Ought citizens of one country to flee to another ? 

Ought man be anxious to ask the names of spirits ? 
Ought any thing to take place and man not know all 
about it ? 

Ought spirits tell man to come and commune 
often ? How often does a lady like to see her betrothed ? 

Do spirits teach love and self sacrifice ? Ought any 
newspapers complain for a want of support ? 

Do spirits teach the doctrine of forgiveness ? Ought 
dogs to fawn on their masters after being whipped ? 

Do spirits teach the doctrine of necessity ? Gan a 
piano be made to sound like a violin ? 

Do spirits teach the doctrine of free agency ? Do 
impressions come from God through uncountable 
millions of intelligences ? 

Do spirits teach that there is one God ? How many 
bricks ought it take to build a chimney ? 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


291 


Do spirits teach that they can only pass through open 
doors ? What is meant by materiality ? 

Do spirits teach that there are spirits that should not 
be conversed with ? When ought infants to be weaned ? 

Do spirits teach that some of their number should 
be believed and others not ? Ought all that electioneer¬ 
ing newspapers say be believed ? 

Ought a man go to spirits to learn about his 
surroundings ? Can a man see his sick father ? 

Ought a man go to spirits to learn whether he 
shall be noble ? By what standard does a man select 
a pig to keep through the winter ? 

Ought a man to go to the spirits to learn whether he 
is a profound reasoner? When ought children be 
talked to as if they were grown people ? 

Is it very important if spirits place a crown on a 
man’s head ? Ought little girls to cry for dolls ? 

Has any one discovered the true spiritual philosophy ? 
Ought dead men to be called spirits ? 

Man can show no reason why he should be anxious 
to convince another that the dead can talk with the 
living, excepting through his selfish feelings. There 
can be no more importance attached to the fact than a 
conversation between two neighbors. It is possible for 
one man to pass another and not see him ; but what 
importance can be attached to the fact that an argument 
is necessary to prove it ? It is possible for man to pass 
another many times and not see him. But if man has 
an attachment for superior men or beings, then it becomes 
important to him if any of those have passed him or are in 
his society ; but he can not prefer one being to another, 
except through his selfish feelings. He can not prove 




292 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


that any one being more than another exercises care 
over him. Any standard by which man may judge 
departed beings to be superior to beings on the earth is 
selfish and dependent. Man has no means of proving 
than any being in the future world is superior to the 
most degraded being in this. Man may talk with every 
being he meets, but it is selfish in him to assert that it 
is more important for him to talk with some than others, 
or that some can do more good ; and it is selfish to 
spend his time in proving that some persons can talk 
with him, for it assumes no importance except through 
selfish preferences. Man may pass a stranger many 
times and hardly know of the fact; but on being made 
acquainted that the stranger was a great man, with whom 
he could have talked and learned where he should go 
after death, and how he should live, and it then becomes 
an important fact to him, it is only through his selfish 
attachments. 

To teach that the dead can talk with the living, to 
tell the world of immortality, arises from the selfish 
feelings ; for immortality is only important to those who 
have a selfish attachment for life, or a selfish attachment 
to individuals. Man dees not so earnestly seek for evi¬ 
dence that animals shall live forever, because he has not 
the selfish attachment for them as for his own species. 
Yet man can not prove himself superior to any animal 
that ever lived except from some selfish basis. A person 
that has a selfish attachment for life, — is anxious 
whether he shall live in the next moment of time, will 
attach great importance to a continuance of life in the 
future world. But the anticipation of any future pleas¬ 
ure, whether from life in the future world or in this, 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


293 


can not be proved superior to any anticipated pleasure 
of which it is possible for man to conceive. It becomes, 
therefore, an act of selfishness to teach that it is import¬ 
ant to know whether the dead can talk with the living ; 
because that importance must arise from selfish consid¬ 
erations. Man may wish to know whether his friend 
lives after his body has been laid in the tomb ; but he 
can show no reason why he should make the inquiry 
respecting his friend than of any other being that has 
existed. The inquiry pre-supposes a doubt whether his 
friend is in as good a condition as he should be. With 
faith in love he would not have this doubt. Man who 
is selfishly attached to life, — anxious whether he shall 
live in the next moment of time or in the future world, 
is not made less selfish by being told that he shall live 
in the next moment of time, or that he shall live forever. 
Man can have as strong a selfish attachment for any 
condition or society in the future world as for any con¬ 
dition or society in this. 

Man may hear voices talking to him; it is not 
important because he is unable to see the individuals ; 
neither should any thing that is said by invisible persons 
be considered as authority because they are invisible. 
Man may hear a voice saying to him that the person 
speaking is his dead friend ; there is no more impor¬ 
tance to the announcement than if any friend should say 
he was in his presence. A man who would make the 
announcement from the dead friend important by saying 
that it taught immortality, is in the same condition as 
parents who would conclude to do something to please 
their children. 

To say that man will do better to know that God, 

25* 


294 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


angels, or departed beings are watching him, is to pre¬ 
sume that man is under the necessity of acting from 
selfish motives. Thieves do not steal when they are 
watched or are certain of detection ; but they have no 
new faith and love because they do not steal ; and the 
world can not be proved to be better when thieves do 
not steal than when they do. 

When man hears a voice speaking to him, it is an act 
of selfishness to make the inquiry whether it is a living 
or a dead person ; because from the inquiry he supposes 
that it is important to- know ; and he can not call it im¬ 
portant to know, except through selfish preferences. If 
man would hearken to the voice of an angel sooner than 
to a child, to God sooner than to the devil, to his de¬ 
parted friends in the future world sooner than to his 
friends in this, he is selfish, and shows his inclination 
to act from authority. If man hears the voice of God, 
angels, devils, or men, living or dead, telling him to do 
what he conceives to be an act of love, he can not avoid 
doing it, except by committing an act of selfishness. 
But if man stops to ask for the author of the intelligence, 
he manifests an inclination to act from authority ; 
and if being told that it is the devil, or some other 
being against whom he has an antipathy, he is likely 
to refuse to give it any attention. 

To teach that it is important to know that departed 
beings can talk with the living because they can give 
to the world purer and better ideas, is also selfish ; be¬ 
cause it presumes that when man becomes acquainted 
with any idea, he should also know the author of 
it. If an animal suggests an act of love to man, it is as 
good as if it came from inspired men. The language by 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


295 




which, it is conveyed to him is as good as any language ; 
and he can not defer the action thus suggested for one 
that God might tell him to do, except through selfish 
preferences. No one being owns any ideas more than 
another ; and it can not be shown that one idea is more 
important than another. Man can not decide that any 
one source more than another should teach him or the 
world, except he judges from a selfish standard. If 
man has any preferences where his ideas may come 
from, he can not act from his love. 

To contend whether any intelligence comes from odd 
force or a departed being is a contention about authority. 
A man who believes that Paul is inspired, acts on his 
belief as authority; and he is inclined to believe that 
Paul’s inspiration comes from the future world. A 
man who believes in Paul’s inspiration, when told that 
a being from the future world is addressing him, will be 
likely to try to avoid this interfering inspiration or 
authority by calling it odd force or mind-reading. He 
feels called upon to abandon an old authority to receive 
a new one; for the old authority he has a selfish 
attachment, therefore he calls the new one odd force. 
The same selfishness that causes a man to avoid calling 
any intelligence as coming from a departed being, 
causes another man to try to make him acknowledge 
that it is a departed being. One man wishes to retain 
Paul as authority ; another man wishes to have him 
believe in superior intelligences as authority, and give 
up Paul. Man does not improve his selfish feelings by 
changing from Paul to superior intelligences ; by giving 
his attention to departed beings instead of the Bible ; by 
leaving the old God and taking up the new one ; by 


296 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


leaving Christ and taking up Caesar ; he only changes 
his selfish feelings. Authority from departed beings is 
as selfish as that from the Bible or from any source ; 
therefore, it is of no consequence whether an intelli¬ 
gence speaking is odd force or Paul, for there is no 
more authority in one than in the other. A man who 
acts from his love will not do any thing sooner for God 
than for the devil; for Christ sooner than for Judas 
Iscariot; for his departed friends sooner than for odd 
force; for the venerable dead sooner than for the mind- 
reader. God, Christ, devil, odd force, or the ancient 
dead, would not interrupt him in hoeing his corn until 
they proposed something that he conceived would be an 
act of love, then he would acknowledge an imperative 
action ; for to do the act of love would be his joy. If 
man would do any thing for Christ sooner than for odd 
force, he is in a selfish condition. Odd force is as 
much authority as Christ, God, or the dead ; and man 
can not prefer one to the other, except through his 
selfish feelings. When a man spends his time in trying 
to convince the world that it is the ancient dead instead 
of odd force that speaks, he is only saying that the 
ancient dead are a higher authority. 

When a person speaking says to man that he is his 
dead brother, and the veracity of the language is 
questioned, it becomes an act of selfishness in the 
person to say any thing more to convince ; for any 
thing further that he may say to prove a particular 
identity, can only be done for the purpose of imposing 
authority. No person can undertake to prove to any 
being that he is a departed friend instead of odd force, 
except through the selfish feelings. Any person may 



GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


297 


say, as an act of love, who he is ; but when he under¬ 
takes to prove his identity, he complies with a selfish 
demand for some selfish purpose. He can not prefer to 
be called the ancient dead instead of odd force, except 
through his selfish feelings ; and he can not prefer that 
any one shall believe that the dead can talk with the liv¬ 
ing, except he has a selfish preference for effects or condi¬ 
tions ; neither can any one make the demand, except he 
wishes to accept or reject some authority. There is no 
more importance in talking with the dead than in talking 
with the living ; and whoever attaches more importance 
to communications from the future world than to com¬ 
munications from this, is in a selfish condition, and will 
be likely to question the veracity of language, because 
it is to his mind important. If, in this condition, he 
becomes convinced that the dead can talk to him, he 
simply changes his selfish feelings to a new authority. 

Man, in teaching that departed beings are superior 
intelligences, is also teaching that their communications 
to this world are superior, while they are always given 
to the world as communicated through some person. One 
person can not teach any thing through another that 
would conflict with his selfish attachments. If man 
believes in God, angels, and devils, no beings can teach 
any thing through him that can directly conflict with these 
ideas. If man believes in a God of mercy and a God 
of wrath, no being can teach through him a God of 
love. No definite instruction can come through a third 
person, because it will interfere with that person’s selfish 
feelings ; and no one has a right to say that the selfish 
attachments of a medium are less to be respected than 
feelings of love. No being can trespass on the selfish 


298 


GOD OF SPIRITUALISM. 


attachments of another, except by an act of selfishness. 
Therefore, if any person would teach through a medium 
any thing that would conflict with any of the medium’s 
selfish attachments, he must be selfish; for there is no 
being in the universe that can presume that his opinions 
are superior to that of another, without being selfish. If 
a departed being could talk to an audience directly, he 
could give any of his opinions ; but if he uses an inter¬ 
preter, he must presume that his opinions are superior, 
in order to give them when they would conflict with the 
interpreter’s selfish loves. 

A man’s sight is always controlled by his selfish attach¬ 
ments. If man believes in God, devils, and angels, in 
going to the future world he will see devils and angels, 
and believe in God as before ; while another with differ¬ 
ent selfish attachments might call his devils angels, and 
his angels devils. All impressions which an individual 
is capable of receiving from another must be con¬ 
trolled by his selfish attachments. A man that desires 
to be rich, is likely to suppose that all desire to be rich, 
and all impressions that he can receive from any person, 
must be controlled by this selfish feeling; and in this 
condition it would be impossible for him to tell others 
by impress ion that it is of no consequence whether they 
are rich men or beggars. Therefore, all teachings through 
third persons must come from selfish beings, or must not 
interfere with the selfish attachments of the individual 
through whom they come. 

When it is meant by spirit and spiritual, that any being 
is in a finer or superior condition, it is teaching a selfish 
love of conditions ; for any standard by which man may 
suppose that one being is finer or superior, is dependent. 


GOD OF NATURE. 


299 


If a being can make worlds he can not show that he is 
superior to the infant child, or is of any more importance 
in the infinity of causes and effects. Therefore, when¬ 
ever it is meant by spirit, spirit impression, and spiritual 
beings, that any things or persons are superior, it arises 
from the selfish feelings. 

O 


ARTICLE LY. 

THE GOD OF NATURE. 

Man can not prove that any one action or existence 
is more natural than another. He may assert, because 
all foxes dig holes in the earth, that it is natural for 
them to do so ; but he has no means of knowing but 
they dig holes in consequence of proclivities in their 
ancestors thousands of years ago, or from educa¬ 
tion, believing that holes are the best kind of shelter. 
It is as natural for man to build a house as for foxes to 
dig holes. Man can not prove that this world is natural; 
he does not know but to the stand point of some beings 
that it is an abortion, and irregular in its manifestations. 
Man can not prove that the trees, birds, or any thing 
conform to the invariable laws of nature; for what he 
calls the invariable laws of nature arise to his mind 
from the regular recurrences he meets with in different 
moments of time. But he has no means of knowing 
that what he calls regular recurrences are any more so 
than what he calls irregular ones. Man can never 
know of a single law in nature, except he can understand 



300 


LEGAL GOD. 


infinity. He can not prove that a comet is any more 
irregular in its course than that of the earth, except 
through a selfish standard. He can not prove himself 
a natural or an unnatural being, although he may find 
millions of worlds of beings like himself; because by the 
standard by which he can prove any thing to be natural 
or unnatural, he can prove all things to be so. If in 
one year the grass instead of being green should be 
black, man might be led to say that it was unnatural; 
but the only proof he would have to this assertion 
would be that in all other years it was green; conse¬ 
quently, the reason why green grass is natural and black 
grass unnatural, is because he believes increased quanti¬ 
ties are more important than diminished quantities. 
Man has no means of knowing that grass should be 
always green, except that he happens to find it so. He 
has no means of proving that grass is a beneficent pro¬ 
duction, or if things had gone on different that there 
would have been any grass. To say that any one thing 
or action is unnatural is the same as saying that all things 
are unnatural, for there is no means of proving one 
thing to be more unnatural than another; and to say 
that all things are unnatural is the same as saying that 
all th’ngs are natural. 


ARTICLE LVI. 

THE LEGAL GOD. 

Did God give laws to the Jews through Moses ? Has 
God had the tjtle of Doctor of Laws conferred upon 
him ? 



LEGAL GOD. 


301 


Was God in anger when his laws were violated? 
How many judges ought to sit on one bench? 

Did offences abound in consequence of the law ? Who 
is the author of odd forces ? 

Did God abrogate the law through Christ ? Is God 
accustomed to self-sacrifices? 

Has God concluded to rule the world by the law of 
love ? Can dogs be taught to run by means of a 
compass ? 

Is a republican government the best ? How much 
slave representation ought there to be ? 

Is a limited monarchy the best ? What number of 
frogs will make the most harmony ? 

Is that society the best where every one has an equal 
amount of property ? Ought wolves to look for lambs 
when they go to drink ? 

Is that society the best where the laws do not conflict 
with man’s nature ? Is it natural for cats to eat grass 
before a rain storm ? 

Is that government the best that is the best adminis¬ 
tered ? How many prisons ought there to be ? 

All laws are selfish and dependent; and no one set of 
laws can be proved to be superior to another, for any time 
or any class of people. Laws imply accountability and 
penalties ; and when man judges that some divine or 
human law has been violated, he must judge -through 
some standard that is changing to his own conceptions in 
every moment of time. Penalties are inflicted because 
some effects takes place which man dislikes ; and he can 
not prove that the cause to any thing that he dislikes 
exists in the present moment any more than in the 
unhidden past and future. 


26 


302 


GOD OF JUSTICE. 


ARTICLE LVII. 

THE GOD OF JUSTICE. 

Is a God all mercy a God unjust? Ought not God 
to have been hung after he had destroyed the first-born 
of the Egyptians? 

Was it necessary for God’s justice that Christ should 
die ? Ought not God to have been tried by a court- 
martial when he permitted aliens to obtain victories over 
the Jews ? 

Was it right for Christ to die on the cross ? Was it 
wrong for Judas Iscariot to betray Christ? 

Ought a man to fight for his country, right or wrong ? 
Did the Canaanites receive the grace of God ? 

Is it right for man to take what does not belong to 
him ? Is it wrong for man to starve to death ? 

Is it right for nations to go to war ? What is the 
expense of national honor ? 

Is it right for religious sects to fight each other ? 
What is the expense of denominative pride ? 

The words justice, right, and wrong, are used with 
reference to selfish attachments. If it were possible for 
man to discover all the motives to every action that takes 
place, he can not pronounce any one more than another 
right or wrong, except through his selfish feelings. 
Man can not prove that an act of love is any more right 
or just than an act of selfishness. He can demonstrate 
what motives would be selfish, but he can not demon¬ 
strate them to be right or wrong. He can demonstrate 
selfish motives to be necessary if a man acts from them ; 
he can demonstrate them to be unnecessary if man does 




GOD OF JUSTICE. 


303 


not act from them. When man does an act of selfish¬ 
ness, there is no means of proving it an unnecessary 
action in the infinity of causes and effects than when he 
does an act of love. One can not be proved to be right, 
wrong, or just, any more than the other. If an act of 
selfishness can be proved to be wrong or unjust, an act 
of love can be proved to be wrong or unjust; for to 
prove that one action in infinity is unnecessary is to 
prove that all action in infinity is unnecessary ; to prove 
that one action in infinity does good, is to prove that all 
action in infinity does good. Man may fence in an 
apple tree, and a neighbor may break down the fence 
and gather the apples in the night; this action can only 
be called a wrong, through selfish standards of judging. 
To be called a wrong, this action must be proved to 
have been unnecessary, which is impossible; for it can 
not be proved to have been more unnecessary than any 
action, or its effects less beneficial. ' To prove it a wrong 
man must be able to demonstrate that he had an exclu¬ 
sive right to the tree, which he has no means of proving, 
except through the selfish preferences of himself or his 
ancestors. Man is led to say that the stealing of the 
apples are wrong, because he deplores the effect ; he 
expected to have apples; his fence that cost him time 
and labor is torn down ; fruit that he depended on to 
buy clothing is gone. But he can not prove that he 
is in an inferior condition in consequence of this effect, 
except through his selfish feelings. He can not say in 
what moments of time he shall gain or loose property, 
without being selfish. He can not be anxious whether 
he shall wear the clothing which he is expecting to pur¬ 
chase, without being selfish. Whoever overcomes all 


304 


GOD OF FREE AGENCY. 


selfish attachment, will be unable to see any thing 
wrong. One man may murder another ; and there is 
no method of proving the action wrong or unnecessary, 
although it can be demonstrated to be an act of selfish¬ 
ness. Man can not prefer one moment in time to 
another for himself or friends for death ; neither can he 
prefer any one method of dying to that of another, 
without being selfish. 

To say that it was necessary for Christ to die on the 
Cross, is to say that every action that ever has or will 
take place is necessary, for every action is infinite in its 
connections ; and if one action did not take place, no 
action of infinity could take place. It was as necessary 
for Judas Iscariot to betray Christ, as it was necessary 
for Christ to die ; the action of Judas Iscariot was as 
right and just as the death of Christ; and there is no 
means of proving that the betrayal has done less good 
or evil than the death on Calvary. The action of Judas 
can be demonstrated to be an act of selfishness; but it 
can not be proved to be any more wrong than right, 
any more unjust than just, except through selfish 
standards of judging. 


ARTICLE LVIII. 

THE GOD OF FREE AGENCY. 

There is no more free agency in one action than 
in another; neither any more necessity in one than 
another. Certain conditions coming about man, the 
animals, and trees, cause certain determinations of action. 



GOD OF FREE AGENCY. 


305 


If there is necessity in any one instance, there is necessity 
in all instances. To say that any one being or thing is 
a free agent, is to say that all beings and things are free 
agents. To say that any one being or thing does not act 
from necessity, is the same as saying that all beings and 
things do not act from necessity, for no more necessity 
can be proved in one action than in another ; and to say 
that all things do not act from necessity, is the same as 
saying that all things do act from necessity. The same 
necessity that causes the growth of plants, causes the 
growth of man’s body ; and the same necessity that 
causes plants to die, causes man to die. The same neces¬ 
sity that causes the growth of plants, causes man to take 
any thing in his hand. Man is conscious of raising his 
hand, but not conscious of the growth of plants ; he is 
conscious of the motives that cause him to raise his hand, 
but not conscious of the motives which cause plants to 
grow; but the motives in one action are as traceable as 
in the other ; and there is the same necessity of action 
in one as in the other. The action of raising the hand 
is an action of which man is conscious; but because he 
is conscious of it and the motives that produce it, it is 
no less an action of necessity than if he was not con¬ 
scious of the action and the motives that produce it. 
A tree surrounded with certain conditions grows in a 
certain manner ; but while it is growing it is surrounded 
by an infinite number of motives or controlling influ¬ 
ences, and that particular influence that is the strongest 
does most towards determining its character. It is the same 
with all action that takes place, whether it comes through 
conscious or unconscious existences. There are an in¬ 
finite number of motives or trolling influences, 
26 * 




306 


GOD OF FREE AGENCY. 


operating on every thing in every moment of time. 
There are an infinite number of motives operating on 
man which cause every action, conscious and unconscious ; 
and the reason why he determines to raise his hand in one 
moment of time is in consequence of certain deter¬ 
minations of controlling influences, which present to 
the consciousness the strongest motive. All conscious 
acting is determined by the strongest motive as much 
as unconscious acting. Mind, determining to act from 
the strongest motive, is in the same conditions as a stone 
falling to the earth, because the strongest motive is thus 
determining its course. But in saying that every action 
is determined by the strongest motive in every moment 
that it takes place, can only be used as ah available proof 
that there is as much necessity in one action as in another. 
The strongest motive comes to the consciousness of man 
in definite moments of time. But man can not prove 
that any one motive or action in infinity has any more 
effect upon him than another. He can not prove that 
any one action in any period of time, past or future, is 
more a motive than another to cause him to raise his 
hand in the present moment of time. The consciousness 
of man must always see the strongest motive determining 
all action in definite moments of time ; and it is by learn¬ 
ing this that he is able to learn that one action in infinity 
is no more a cause or effect to any thing that takes place 
than another ; — for, to prove a definite action taking 
place in one moment of time from the strongest motive, 
is to prove that all action takes place in all periods of 
time from the strongest motive ; which is the same as 
saying that one action is no more a cause to an effect 
than another ; for to destroy any one action in infinity, 


GOD OF FREE AGENCY. 


307 


or to make it different, is to destroy all action in infinity 
or to make all action in infinity different. 

Man’s existence, in every given point in time, is to 
him a necessity. He can not prove that he or any 
other being can cease to exist; persons may disappear 
from his sight, but he can not be conscious that they 
cease or can cease to exist; hence, man’s existence in 
every given point in time is to him a necessity. 

Man’s existence is in every locality in which he does 
exist; or, what is the same, his causing himself to be 
in any locality, is to him a necessity. Man can not be 
conscious of causing his existence ; neither can he be 
conscious of causing himself to be in that locality in 
which he is first conscious of existence; hence, his 
existence in that given point in time and in that locality 
must be to him a necessity. 

After possessing the consciousness of existence, action 
in every conscious moment of time is imperative; for 
man becoming conscious in a given time and in a 
definite locality, must decide in that time and locality to 
remain where he is, or to remove to another locality. 
Hence, the necessity of action belongs to beings in every 
conscious moment; for man acts as much in deciding 
that he will not act as in deciding that he will act; he 
acts as much by determining that he will remain in one 
locality as by determining that he will remove ; or in 
remaining as in removing. 

Hence, all the actions of man are imperative, and 
his existence in any locality or his causing himself to 
be in any locality, is imperative, and to him a necessity; 
because, when he is first conscious of existence, that 
existence is a necessity in some locality; and every 


308 


GOD OF FREE AGENCY. 


action subsequent to this period is a necessity, or 
imperative ; and the determination of every action is a 
necessity, in consequence of the strongest motive or 
influence. Therefore, man’s existence in every point of 
time and in every locality that he does exist, is to him 
a necessity. 

Man is conscious of the power to will and do ; and 
is also conscious of the power of choosing what he will 
do. Man may assert that he could have done different 
from what he did, because he is conscious in each 
present moment of willing that he has the power of 
choosing what he will do. But there are no means of 
proving that man could have done different from what 
he did. That man is conscious of the power of 
choosing, does not prove that it is possible for him to 
have done any different from what he did, or that he 
can do in the future any different from what he is to do. 
Man can not be conscious of doing any thing unless he 
knows of some moment in time in which he is conscious 
of the power of choosing. It is not in the power of 
man to do any thing which he is not to do in the future ; 
or to do any different from what he is to do in the 
future; neither was it in his power to have done any 
different from what he has done, or to have done any 
thing which he did not do. Man should not suppose 
that his consciousness is a deception if he can not do 
different from what he does, because he is conscious of 
deciding what he will do. But without this power of 
deciding what he will do under the circumstances of his 
control in the present moments of existence, he would 
not be a conscious being. Man is conscious of choosing 
or deciding what he will do ; and this consciousness 


GOD OF HAPPINESS. 


309 


arises to his mind in consequence of the different 
motives, or causes and effects, that invite him to action 
in given times and definite localities. 

In saying that man has the power, liberty, or freedom 
of choosing, it is not an assertion that man can refuse to 
choose, for man is under the necessity of acting; and 
hence must choose how he will act; and in acting 
he must do so from the strongest motive. 


ARTICLE LIX. 

THE GOD OF HAPPINESS. 

Will man be happy when he is in heaven? When 
do cattle appear the most contented ? 

Will a man be happy when he is in the New Jerusa¬ 
lem ? Is opera music divine ? 

Will man be happy when he arrives at the highest 
sphere ? What kind of soil will produce the best 
wheat ? 

Will man be happy if he spends six hundred dollars 
at a watering place ? Will man be happy if he secures 
a debt of fifty dollars ? 

Will man be happy if he becomes one of Christ’s 
sheep ? Ought dogs become attached to new masters ? 

Will man be happy if he joins the church ? Will 
camphor keep persons from fainting ? 

Will man be happy if he obtains religion ? What is 
the test of God’s love in the heart ? 

Will a man be happy if he goes to the opera ? Does 
man anticipate music from angelic choirs ? 



310 


GOD OF HAPPINESS. 


Will man be happy if he goes to the convention ? 
What orators are advertised to speak ? 

Will man be happy if he goes to the theatre? Do 
philanthropists weep over fallen humanity ? 

Will man be happy if he goes to a festival ? What 
are toasts respecting honored institutions worth ? 

Will man be happy if he goes to a public dinner ? 
Ought any one to speak after feeling that he is incompe¬ 
tent to do justice to exalted sentiments ? 

Will man be happy if he attends the celebration ? 
Ought public speakers to read the notes of reporters in 
newspapers ? 

Is this world a fleeting show ? Will there be 
agreeable changes in heaven ? 

Is this world vexation of spirit and vanity ? Has 
any one joined the angelic choir ? 

Is this world dark and full of sorrow ? Will there 
be joy in the higher life ? 

Is this world full of degraded humanity ? When 
will God’s poet children sing ? 

Does death admonish man that this world is not his 
home ? Ought cabbages to be transplanted ? 

Will the pure in heart see God ? Is it better for man 
to marry than to burn ? 

Will the meek inherit the earth ? What are farms in 
heaven worth ? 

Will God in no instance clear the guilty ? How 
much of a man’s life ought to be spent in chasing bears ? 

Ought a man to say there is peace when there is no 
peace ? Why do the leaves of trees appear green ? 

When ought a man to say there is just cause for war? 
What amount of glory has come down from ancient times ? 


GOD OF HAFPINESS. 


311 




Will a man be happy if he becomes rich and famous ? 
How much treasure can a man lay up in heaven ? 

The anticipation of happiness is an act of selfishness. 
The seeking of happiness away from the present moments 
of existence is selfish, because man can not anticipate 
any happiness from love ; for the moment he has faith in 
it he receives it. To suppose that the object of life here 
is to obtain eternal joy, is to suppose that it can be 
bought. Man in pursuing after happiness as the end of 
life, must be led to suppose that any means by which 
that end can be attained is allowable. If he should seek 
for eternal joy by any means which it could be obtained, 
it must be allowable; and this makes allowable any 
means by which man can obtain to his conception any 
pleasures. He has no means of proving that one antici¬ 
pated pleasure is more selfish than another. A man 
who reads the Bible that he may have joy in the future 
world, is in the same selfish condition as one who lays 
by money that he may enjoy some sensual pleasure. 
Man can only anticipate any future happiness except 
from a love of condition ; and what he calls the end or 
object of life is a selfish preference. He concludes he 
would rather go to heaven than to hell ; to the highest 
than to the lowest sphere ; to the New Jerusalem than 
to Tartarus ; to the city than to the country; live in a 
splendid mansion than a log cabin ; walk through parks 
than through woods ; hear the music of harps than jews- 
harps. If the seeking of a future heaven is allowable, 
then the seeking of any future pleasure is allowable. 
Any anticipated joy or pleasure can be bought and sold. 
Man can gain or lose his heaven, Christ, God, angels, 
farms, parks, horses, churches, theatres, and houses of 


312 


GOD OF MARRIAGE. 


ill fame. He may lose or gain these things by his own 
acts, — he may buy and sell them all. If it is allowable 
for man to seek joy in the future world, it is allowable 
for him to seek it in a house of ill fame ; and there is no 
means by which one course can be demonstrated to be any 
more selfish than the other. When man goes out of the 
present moment of existence to anticipate any pleasure, 
he commits an act of selfishness, because he expects that 
pleasure to arise from some selfish attachment; and to 
make the means by which any one anticipated pleasure 
can be gained allowable, is to make allowable the means 
by which all anticipated pleasures can be gained. 


ARTICLE LX. 

THE GOD OF MARRIAGE. 

Marriage with man should not be the selecting of 
one woman in preference to others, through selfish 
attachments. Man can not prove that one woman in 
preference to another should be his wife, except through 
his selfish feelings. The same act of selfishness that 
caused man to fence in a piece of land for his selfish 
uses caused him to select woman for his selfish uses. 
Man can not select one woman from another, nor 
woman select one man from another, for any exclusive 
privilege, except through some selfish attachment. As 
an act of love, it is impossible for two beings to say that 
they exclusively belong to each other ; for any standard 
by which they may try to prove it, is selfish and depend- 



GOD OF MARRIAGE. 


313 


ent. The marriage institute arises in consequence of 
sexual intercourse taking place for personal gratification, 
and of the mutual dependence which two beings con¬ 
clude to exercise upon each other. Man has a selfish 
attachment for property, because in using it he has fears 
that it will not always be in his possession, and because 
he supposes he is not protected in all moments of time. 
In the same way are selfish attachments formed between 
the sexes. Man selects one woman to be his wife 
beeause he fears that indulgence, and the acts on which 
both mutually depend, could not take place when wished. 
The appropriation of woman to his particular use is as 
selfish as the appropriation of property. Man has no 
reason to suppose that he shall not possess in every 
moment of time what he should ; and because he has 
not faith that he shall, he appropriates property and 
woman to his selfish uses. Indulgence is as selfish for 
personal gratification in the marriage institute, as in a 
house of ill fame. Man who marries for indulgence is 
as selfish as if he went to a house of ill fame. It is also 
as selfish in man to conclude that he will have sexual 
intercourse once a year, or in five years, as to conclude 
that he will have it all the time for personal pleasure. 
It is no more selfish in man to murder a nation than to 
murder an infant child; because he can not prove but 
the child is of as much consequence as the nation. 
Diminished are not superior or inferior to increased 
quantities and numbers. If man is under the necessity 
at any time of practising self-denial, sexual intercourse 
can not take place wfith him as an act of love; for he has 
no means of knowing what is an act of love with reference 
to any action, when he has selfish attachments that can 

27 


314 


GOD OF CHILDREN. 


exert any influence over him in doing it. No pleasure 
can be sought from indulgence, except as an act of selfish¬ 
ness ; and no pleasure is anticipated from marriage, 
except through selfish attachments. 

The marriage institute is likely to create a mutual 
dependence of two individuals upon each other, which 
is selfish ; because it can not be proved that two individ¬ 
uals should any more depend on each other than they 
should upon any thing else. It is selfish in woman to 
depend on man for support, and it is selfish in man to 
depend on woman to take care of the house. The 
ceremony of marriage may be performed over two indi¬ 
viduals ; but to be free, neither should form any selfish 
attachment for the other ; or suppose that either one is 
any more the wife or husband of the other, than any other 
woman or man that ever has or can exist. 


ARTICLE LXI. 

THE GOD OF CHILDREN. 

Are all Christians the children of God ? Can a child 
born out of wedlock go to heaven ? 

Was Christ the only begotten Son of God ? Are all 
Christians illegitimate children ? 

If a man spares the rod will he spoil the child ? At 
what age ought dogs to fight ? 

It is selfishness ever to address a child as an inferior 
being, consequently all baby talk is selfish. Children 
discover themselves to be inferior beings through the 



GOD OF CHILDREN. 


315 


selfishness of those who presume them to be such. It 
is as selfish to talk to infants and children for personal 
gratification, as to do any thing else from the same mo¬ 
tive. Infants are not fondled, kissed, and babied, for their 
good, but for the gratification of those who do it. In¬ 
fants are not long in learning that they are objects of 
selfish preferences to their parents. When they have 
learned this they learn to be selfish ; and they learn to be 
selfish by knowing that when they ask questions, it is 
not so important as when grown people ask them ; and 
they learn to be selfish by finding that they are some¬ 
times in the way of their parents ; and they learn to be 
selfish by finding that they must be whipped for breaking 
a number of plates, and that nothing is said to them when 
they loose a pin ; and they learn to be selfish by discov¬ 
ering that it is more important to eat with a fork than a 
knife ; they learn to be selfish by learning that the differ¬ 
ence between the sexes is an important secret never to 
be mentioned ; they learn to be selfish by being told that 
there are good and bad children in the w T orld ; they learn 
to be selfish by being made to promise to be good; they 
learn to be selfish by having presents of playthings 
given to them ; they learn to be selfish by discovering 
that it is an important affair to mind their parents or guar¬ 
dians. No child was ever punished except it interfered 
with some selfish attachment. A child wishes to eat 
pie, the mother wishes it to eat potatoe; a child wishes 
to make a noise, the mother wishes it to be silent; a 
child wishes to tumble on the floor, the mother wishes it 
to observe a certain position in a chair ; a child wishes 
to sit up, the mother wishes it to go to bed ; a child 
breaks the most costly mirror, the mother imprisons it in 


316 


GOD OF CHILDREN. 


a dark room ; a child smashes the earthen-ware, the 
mother whips it; a child refuses to do an errand, the 
mother scolds ; the child does not wish to go to school, 
the mother offers it candy. What bondage is more 
grievous than that of children, who are obliged almost 
constantly to forego their own selfish preferences, to take 
np with the selfish preferences of their parents or guar¬ 
dians ? A parent can prove no more right to exercise 
any authority over a child than over any being that ever 
has or can exist. If it can be proved that any child 
should be under any bondage, it can be proved that 
every being should be under bondage. If a parent can 
prove that he should exercise any authority over a child, 
it can be proved that the parent has a right to exercise 
authority over every being in the universe. Noexc lu- 
sive right can be proved over a child because it is given 
into the hands of parents. Parents can not prove that 
their selfish preferences are superior to those of their 
children. It is as much an act of oppression to force a 
child to do any thing against its will, as to force slaves 
to work under the lash. It is as much an act of oppres¬ 
sion to command a child to do any thing as it is to force 
it to do it. Man can not prove his child to be inferior 
to God, Christ, or the angels ; and when he treats his 
child as inferior to any being in the universe, he com¬ 
mits an act of selfishness. Men speak to their equals in 
civil language to request favors. Why do they presume 
children to be slaves ? When a child wishes to stay 
from school, where does that right come from by which 
man forces the child. The selfishness that taught slaves 
to run at the bidding of their masters, taught children 
that they were inferior, and should obey their parents or 


GOD OF CHILDREN. 


317 


guardians. The same selfishness that causes a mother 
to take a nestling child from its cradle to fondle and kiss 
it, causes her in later years to whip it because it does not 
do as she wishes. To give a command to do a thing always 
implies that force is to be used, if the command is not 
complied with. How long are children in discovering 
the various tricks and subterfuges by which they can 
overcome a command that has been given them ? How 
long before they learn what the selfish inclinations of 
their guardians are, and to constantly appeal to them to 
overcome obstacles in the way of their own selfish 
preferences ? How long before they learn to use 
deception through their excuses for not doing things as 
commanded ? 

Restraints can be used over children as an act of love ; 
but this can only take place in order to be faithful from 
the consciousness that all aspire for joy. Hence, parents 
and guardians should prevent children from doing those 
things which would be likely to bring pain and distress, 
the same as they would endeavor to prevent the storm 
from doing injuries. 

By what means does a man learn that his child wants 
a baby doll or a top ? Why are children called childish ? 
Is it a beautiful thing to see children take baby dolls 
and rock them in cradles ? Is the child that does this 
any more a child than the being that learns it how to 
do it ? Is the child that spins tops any more a child 
than the being that learns it to become attached to it ? 
Are the playthings to which a child becomes attached 
of any less importance than the playthings to which man 
becomes attached ? What is the difference between 
owning a top and owning a house ? There is no difference. 


97* 


318 


GOD OF CHILDREN. 


except through the selfish feelings. Some children 
learn to be spendthrifts, because they learn to have a 
selfish attachment for things that cost money; other 
children learn to be avaricious, because they learn to 
have a selfish attachment for things that produce money 
instead of those things that cause its outlay. There is 
no difference between the selfishness of the two classes ; 
although society may call the spendthrift foolish and 
dishonest, and the avaricious one as sharp and respect¬ 
able. The selfishness in both instances commences with 
the child’s playthings. 

The child learns through the selfishness of others to 
call some things right and others wrong. If the 
guardian of a child has an attachment for flowers, and 
the child destroys them, it learns through the grief of 
the guardian that it has committed a great wrong; 
while there is no means of proving that the wrong is 
any greater than if the child had destroyed weeds. It 
is no more selfish in a child to cut a newspaper than to 
cut its mother’s silk dress. If it is laughed at for one 
and punished for the other, it learns that cutting the 
paper was right and cutting the dress was wrong ; while 
with another guardian it would be laughed at for cutting 
the dress, and punished for cutting the newspaper. 
Right and wrong actions are determined through the 
selfish attachments. It is no more selfish in man to 
burn a city than to burn his neighbor’s barn. If he 
burns a city that is at enmity with his country, his 
name may go to posterity as a noble hero ; if he burns 
a city in his own country, he may be hung ; if he burns 
his neighbor’s barn, he may be imprisoned. But the 
selfishness that can do one of these will do them all. 


GOD OF CHILDREN. 


319 


It is no more an act of love in a man to feed a child 
than to feed a nation ; the love that will do one will do 
the other. The only distinction it is possible for right 
and wrong to teach, is to call that action right, the 
effect of which is liked, and to call that action wrong, 
the effect of which is disliked. Man may suppose in 
burning a belligrent city that he has done his country 
and God service ; and if told to make reprisals on his 
neighbor’s property, who had insulted him, would 
declare it to be wrong. Where does this education 
commence ? Does it not commence with the child, who 
learns that it is right to cut the newspaper, and 
wrong to cut the silk dress ? It is selfish in a child to 
cut any thing for its amusement; and consequently, 
when it cuts a newspaper for its gratification, the same 
act of selfishness will lead to any of the known crimes 
among men. It is an act of selfishness to learn a child 
to do any thing for personal gratification. When a child 
shakes a tin rattle it is an act of selfishness, and it is also 
an act of selfishness to learn a child to be amused with 
one ; and there is no means of proving that the shaking 
of a tin rattle by a child, is any less an act of selfishness 
than any act that it is possible to take place. All crimes 
are committed for personal gratification. There is no 
means of proving that it is more selfish to destroy weeds 
for personal pleasure, than to burn a house, although 
the effects are different. Man may kill birds for 
pleasure, but never burn houses ; but there is no differ¬ 
ence in the selfishness of a man that will kill birds, and 
of a man that will burn a house. One man will kill 
birds and not burn houses, because he believes the de¬ 
struction of property is wrong, and that it is a harmless 


320 


GOD OF CHILDREN. 


matter to kill birds. But another man will burn houses 
and cities, believing that it is right to retaliate and to 
take reprisals. The first thing that is done to amuse a 
child is the commencement of its selfish education ; and 
the first acts of selfishness in a child can not be proved to 
be superior or inferior to any act of selfishness known 
among men. If a child is taught to cut any thing for 
its amusement, it should not be told that cutting silk 
dresses or damask curtains is wrong ; for if it is allow¬ 
able for a child to do one thing for its personal amuse¬ 
ment, it is allowable for it to do any thing for its 
amusement. If it is necessary to amuse a child, it is 
a selfish consideration that withholds from it a silk 
dress instead of a piece of paper. If it is necessary to 
amuse a child, it is selfish in man to prefer a tin rattle 
to the burning of his house ; or the burning of his 
house to a tin rattle. It is an act of selfishness to take 
away one thing from a child and give it another in 
preference, to amuse it; and the act can never be done 
except through the selfish attachment of the individual 
doing it. 

Man should not seek to be released from the care of 
children, or look upon them as the harbingers of 
anxieties and griefs; but should accept them as mes¬ 
sengers of love. He should try to obey the influences 
to which every infant messenger calls him; for he should 
have faith to receive what is sent to perfect him in 
beauty. 

Those who have the care of children, and are not the 
parents, should not be the less faithful, for they are not the 
less to them messengers of love. Whoever have children 
in their charge, are their guardians, as much as if they 


GOD OF REASON. 


321 


were their own offspring ; for no one can determine to 
love one child more or less than any other being, with¬ 
out being selfish. No selfish love should interfere with 
parents or guardians to make them neglectful of their 
charge. If a child should interfere with the selfish 
love of one, he should seek to overcome that selfishness. 
Those who have children in their care should have faith 
that they are protected, and be faithful. 

Guardians should not be the less faithful over chil¬ 
dren, although the property has been squandered that 
they think should have been appropriated to the children’s 
support. 


ARTICLE L X 11. 

THE GOD OE REASON. 

All men reason correctly. It is impossible for man 
to draw an imperfect or indirect conclusion from any 
standard that he may adopt. There is no contention 
among men, except about their selfish attachments. 
One man may have a conception of a circle, and draw a 
straight line through its centre, and say that this line 
divides the area of the circle into two parts, both of 
which are equal to each other; and he can find no one 
to dispute him that has a conception of it. The same 
certainty guides man in every endeavor of his reasoning 
power. For man to make an imperfect deduction from 
any thing that he has a conception of, is an impossi¬ 
bility. All men that have a conception of the same 
standard will agree with each other in their deductions ; 



322 


GOD OF REASON. 


men disagree because they adopt different standards to 
which they are selfishly attached. All men that have a 
conception of a circle will allow every legitimate de¬ 
duction that is made respecting it. The reason of this 
is, that they all agree upon the same standard. All 
can agree on what constitutes a circle, but when one man 
draws lines to make a circle, all can disagree about it. 
There is no means of proving that one man can draw a 
line in any course and have it nearer to a circle than 
any other line. Man can prove that if he draws a 
straight line it will not make a circle, but he can not 
prove that t here ever was or ever can be such a thing 
as a straight line ; neither can he prove that there ever 
was or can be such a thing as a circle. A being must 
understand infinity in order to know whether there ever 
was such a thing as a straight line or a circle. But 
when the straight line or the circle is adopted as a 
standard to reason from, every deduction made from it 
will be correct. But if men have selfish attachments 
when they draw lines to make circles, they will be 
very likely to dispute about them. Although man may 
often contradict himself, he reasons as correctly as if he 
did not; but the reason why he contradicts himself is 
in consequence of the conflicting standards from which he 
reasons, which are objects of selfish attachment. Man 
may believe in an infinite actor, for which he has a 
selfish attachment, and all the deductions that he will 
make from his conception of the infinite actor will be 
correct; but he will cease to reason about the infinite 
; actor, as soon as the deductions will contradict the 
deductions from another standard, for which he has a 
pelfish attachment. Man may adopt tjie standard that 


GOD OF REASON. 


323 


the guilty must be punished, and then he may adopt 
the standard that there must be an infinite actor ; he 
will make deductions from the two standards until he 
perceives them to conflict, and then he will be likely to 
observe that most things are past human reason. He 
can not allow that an infinite actor is the author of every 
thing that takes place, because to do this he must allow 
that the infinite actor is the author of those acts by 
which the guilty are punished. Man never rejects a 
legitimate deduction of another, but rejects the standard, 
which standard is however one of his conception. It is 
possible for man to have a great number of conflicting 
standards to reason from, and be selfishly attached to all 
of them. In this condition he is not likely to make 
many deductions, and is likely to believe that human 
reason is treacherous and not reliable. Man may have 
a strong desire to punish those who do him injuries ; 
this desire is a standard for him to reason from; and 
consequently he would accept no standard in his own 
mind by which it was possible to prove that man was 
not an accountable being; because by so doing it would 
conflict with the selfish desire of administering punish¬ 
ment. Man may adopt the strongest motive to act 
from, as a standard, and also adopt that man is an 
accountable being, and is punished through the conse¬ 
quences of his acts ; which is the same as saying, that 
man is not an accountable being, and is not punished 
through the consequences of his acts ; for to say that 
one man is punished through the consequences of 
his acts, is to say that all men are punished through the 
consequences of their acts ; which is the same as saying 
that no one is punished. 


324 


GOD OF REASON. 


A profound reasoner is a term usually applied to 
those who have selfish attachments for a number of 
conflicting standards, and who undertake to harmonize 
them. In making consistent conflicting standards, man 
is obliged to adopt new or intermediate standards. Any 
standard of which he may have a conception, he will 
make a correct deduction from. But the standard from 
which men reason should not be confounded with the 
term premises, as used in the Schools. Man may 
accept as a truth that the guilty should be punished, 
and in accepting it he accepts a standard to reason from. 
But if he is called on to prove that the guilty should be 
punished he makes a deduction from this standard, 
and calls the deduction his premises, from which to 
arrive at the conclusion that the guilty should be 
punished. Man must start from some standard or he 
can not reason; and the standard that he reasons from 
is some thing of which he has a conception. Man may 
accept the standard that there is one God, and when 
called on to prove that there is one God, he makes 
deductions from this standard, and calls them his 
premises. The premises would never have had any 
existence in his mind, were it not for the standard from 
which they arise as a deduction. Man may believe 
that there is a God from childhood, and the premises 
never arise to his mind until he is called on to prove 
there is a God. But God is the selfish attachment and 
standard ; the premises the deduction. 

Man may accept the standard that God is love, and 
then he may accept the standard that God is wrath; if 
he has a selfish attachment for both of these he will be 
likely to suppose that God will love whom he will love, 


GOD OF REASON. 


325 


and hate whom he will hate, which is the same as saying 
that it is impossible for God to do either. The term 
profound reasoner is also applied to those who refuse to 
reason respecting their conflicting standards, but use the 
learning of the Schools in endeavors to make the people 
adopt their selfish attachments as their own. To assert 
that one man can reason better than another is the asser¬ 
tion of an impossibility. Man does not reason better 
than another, because he can use language that another 
can not understand. The Indians can talk with each 
other, and there may be many that can not understand 
them. 

Man may relinquish one standard and adopt a new 
one, and for it form a new selfish attachment, and 
consequently a new standard to reason from. Man may 
nave a strong selfish attachment for the standard that 
Christ is the son of God, and change this standard to 
the belief that the dead must furnish this world with 
truth. He may, in consequence of a selfish attachment 
to this last standard, believe that he reasoned in a foolish 
manner when he supposed Christ to be the son of God; 
but he reasons as well in one belief as in another, for it 
is impossible for him to reason incorrectly. To say that 
man can reason incorrectly is to say that man should not 
act for himself, and that no one should be allowed to act 
for him. As far as it is possible for any class of men to 
have a conception of the same standard, they reason in 
the same channel, and the reason that other people do 
not arrive at the same conclusions is because they adopt 
different standards. Man may say of another, that he 
reasons correctly respecting some things and incorrectly 
respecting others ; but the reason of his making this 
28 


326 GOD OF DESIRES. 

assertion is, that a standard has been adopted in one 
instance that he has adopted, and in the other instance 
one that he disbelieves. Every thing that a man likes 
and dislikes, and every thing that he receives on author¬ 
ity, and every thing that he does not, are standards from 
which he reasons. Man, that has a number of selfish 
standards to reason from, is not an inferior reasoner to 
the one who has none. A man that contradicts himself 
in every sentence is not an inferior reasoner to one who 
never contradicts himself. But no one standard can 
be proved to be superior to another to reason from ; all 
the conflicting standards of selfishness can not be proved 
to be superior to the one standard of love ; or any one 
standard of selfishness be proved to be superior to 
another ; and the reason is that man can not prove that 
love is superior to selfishness, or joy superior to misery. 
When man is free from selfishness he will have no con¬ 
flicting standards to reason from, for he can not dispute 
what particular line is the nearest to a circle. To say 
that one man can not reason correctly, is to say that all 
men can not reason correctly, which is the same as 
saying that all men do reason correctly. 


ARTICLE L X111. 

THE GOD OF DESIRES. 

Can a man love the being that would take his gold 
and the titles of all his property from their recesses, 
and scatter them to the winds ? 

Can a man love the being that would take away the 



GOD OF DESIRES. 


327 


vital breath of his father, mother, brother, sister,- wife, 
child, and friend ? 

Can a man love the being that would set fire to his 
buildings, his fields of grain, his lands of timber, and 
his orchards ? 

Can a man love the being that would destroy all his 
ornaments of dress, disfigure his countenance, make him 
deformed ? 

Can a man love the being that would destroy all the 
churches, theatres, libraries, colleges, and theological 
schools ? 

Can a man love the being that would destroy all 
great men, little men, governors, presidents, senators, 
doctors of divinity, doctors of laws, doctors of physic, 
judges, statesmen, orators, kings, barons, and dukes ? 

Can a man love the being that would cause his name 
to go to posterity as a villain and a traitor ? 

Can a man love the being that would destroy the 
reputation of his wife, sister, child, father, mother, or 
friend ? 

Can a man love the being that would remove from him 
his present means of obtaining a living ? 

Can a man love the being that would destroy all kinds 
of religion, science, and philosophy ? 

Can a man love the being that should succeed in 
making his wife, child, or sister, a harlot ? 

Can a man love the being that would succeed in having 
him sentenced to imprisonment or to be hung ? 

Can a man love the being that would destroy his 
belief, and prevent any one from adopting it ? 

Can a man love the being that is constantly seeking 
his life ? 


328 


GOD OF DESIRES. 


Can a man love those of lofty positions who scorn 
him ? 

Can a man find a being whom he does not love ? 

Man believes there is joy in the possession of those 
things and conditions for which he has an attachment. 

If man is seeking to be rich, it is his joy. Man 
should not seek wealth, but seek to be faithful; for it 
he was appointed to seek riches, he would find it, and 
it would make him free. But man cannot seek riches 
and love. There must be the few rich and the many 
poor, or none could be rich ; if then, all are seeking to 
be rich, all are seeking a dependent condition. Man 
cannot love others without seeking to give to them 
everything he would seek for himself. 

There are rich and poor men ; therefore it is of no 
consequence whether one is rich or poor, and man 
should not seek for either condition ; if he does, he 
seeks for a selfish love. That one has wealth and an¬ 
other poverty, in itself should not be considered of any 
consequence ; and men should have no more attach¬ 
ment for wealth than for poverty, for their desire 
should be to be faithful. 

Man should not seek an equal distribution of prop¬ 
erty ; for in doing this, he w T ould only be inviting 
others to new conditions of selfish loves. Whether 
men are rich or poor, only becomes of consequence to 
them through their selfishness. As man should not 
seek riches or poverty for himself, he should not seek it 
for others. Man is always in that condition best for 
him. Riches or poverty are in themselves of no conse¬ 
quence ; but they are messengers to give men strength 
to enjoy liberty. 


GOD OF DESIRES. 


329 


There are many beggars, and why may not people 
beg ? Man should be willing to beg if called on to do 
so ; for he must be faithful in all conditions of life. If 
man has pride that would prevent him from begging, to 
be forced to beg, would be to throw him into a condition 
in which pride must be overcome. There is no pride 
among the free ; and therefore, to one who has found 
liberty, it would be no annoyance to beg. Those who 
beg, do so because it is their method of receiving 
their beauties. Therefore, man should not be anxious 
whether he begs or starves, for if it was appointed 
that he should know this condition, he should also 
desire the same ; and if in this condition he should 
loose his pride or selfish attachment to wealth, he should 
esteem it the appointed condition to bring him into a 
new love. If man loves, he will cease to fear any of 
the conditions of life in which he may be placed. 

Does man desire deliverance from the hands of his ene¬ 
mies, and from their heavy burthens ? If he loves he will 
not see enemies, but see all as his brothers and sisters. 
Man can toil in joy for his betrothed, wife, or child ; he 
should also toil in joy for his enemies; and his toil will 
be joyous, if he loves them. Man should not seek to 
toil for one more than another, but seek to be faithful in 
that condition of toil in which he is placed. No one 
can do more than be in constant action all the time ; and 
if man would not toil for some, before he can be free, he 
must learn to see joy in toiling under the same con¬ 
ditions he w T ould seek to leave. Man should not seek to 
choose, for it is impossible for him to understand what 
kind of toil will best perfect his love. It is selfish¬ 
ness to seek release from burthens for the sake of per- 


28* 


330 


GOD OF DESIRES. 


sonal ease. If man, while compelled to bear burthens 
for his enemies, shall love those enemies, his heavy bur¬ 
thens become his joy. It is joy for all beings to toil for 
those they love ; therefore, if man loves all beings, 
everywhere he toils will be a toil of joy. If man loves 
his enemies it will give him joy to toil for them. There¬ 
fore, if man is compelled to toil for his enemies and he 
shall learn that he can toil for them joyously, is not that 
condition in which the result is gained as preferable ? 
Ought he to pray to be released from enemies ? Bur¬ 
thens and enemies only exist to man through his selfish 
loves. Man should not seek conditions for himself or 
the world, for in doing so he is seeking new channels 
for the selfish feelings ; and the reason why he would 
alter what takes place is because he would seek freedom 
after his own desires. 

Is man sitting by his fire-side in a comfortable con¬ 
dition, and does he desire that his condition may not be 
disturbed ? To be in a comfortable condition is not a 
condition of selfishness, but immediately becomes so if 
one has any fears that the condition shall not continue. 
Man should not desire that he should be undisturbed in 
any condition in life ; for if his present condition con¬ 
tinues, he never can find his home of liberty. 

If a man should find his buildings in flames he should 
not be grieved or alarmed ; and if he is so, it should tell 
him of the strength of his selfish loves. Would he be 
grieved on account of the useless sacrifice of property ? 
If so, he has learned that property is of consequence. 
If property was of importance it would be impossible 
for it to be destroyed; and man is without faith in love 
if he thinks can be taken from him any thing he needs. 


GOD OF DESIRES. 


331 


Property becomes of consequence to man through selfish¬ 
ness, and when it is taken from him he learns the strength 
of his desire. Man should not have an attachment for 
property or buildings in preference to any thing else; if 
he has, this attachment must be overcome; and until 
it is, his joy is dependent. If the destruction of property 
shall learn man that it is of no consequence, no more 
burning of his buildings will afflict him ; and is not that 
condition in which he learns this as preferable ? Man 
must not seek conditions, but should see in every con¬ 
dition in which he is placed his joy. Man must love 
the enemy that sets fire to his buildings, but he can only 
do so through an act of faith, believing it to be joy. Man 
knows enemies because of his selfishness ; and in becom¬ 
ing free he will see joy in toiling for one as much as for 
another. The joy that arises in this toil does not arise 
from gratification, and is not dependent on conditions. 

Does man wish to be famous for noble deeds, that the 
young may revere his name ? Would he write a book 
of virtuous love, of wise maxims, or the history of his 
country ? Would he be governor or president ? Love 
will cause man to seek to do good constantly; but it is 
an act of selfishness to seek to have his name identified 
with that good. If man would be famous for doing 
good, the selfish desire of fame may cause him to work 
much more than his love. Man should seek to work 
because of his love. What man does through love, he 
does not do for fame. If man toils in order to be 
famous, he is toiling for a dependent joy, for there are 
many famous and unknown; therefore, it is of no con¬ 
sequence whether man is famous or not. If man toils 
from his love, irrespective of all considerations, joy goes 


332 


GOD OF DESIRES. 


with him continually ; but if it is of any consequence 
to him whether he is famous'; whether he has any credit 
for what he does or not— his joy is dependent; there¬ 
fore man can not seek to give his name to the world 
except as an act of selfishness. 

Man can not love and seek for fame, for whatever he 
seeks for himself, he must seek to give to others. It is 
an act of selfishness for him to prefer himself before 
others ,* if fame is of consequence, he should seek to 
make every one famous ; and he should not seek fame 
for himself until he has sought it for every one else. 
But what man can not seek to give all, he should not 
seek to give to any one. 

Will man seek some office that he may do good ? If 
he loves, it will give him as much joy if some one else 
has the same office ; and he should not judge between 
himself and another, and suppose that he can do the 
most good. If man would teach others, and lay out 
certain kinds of work to do, and another should do and 
teach the same things before him, he should have the 
same joy as if he had done it himself; and if he loves 
he must welcome the one doing this as his brother. If 
he can not do this, would not the condition of life that 
should teach him to love under these circumstances be 
as preferable ? 

If man would write a book and give his conceptions 
of truth to the world, he ought to have the same joy if 
another should write the same things, and it should be 
preferred to his ; and his joy will be the same except his 
selfishness prevents. Does man say he would be paid 
for the toil and labor of composing his book ? If he 
would ask for this, it is a good time for him to seek to 


GOD OF DESIRES. 


333 


be taken from the sordid cares of earth. Does one 
think his book contains more truth than another ? 
What is best should be believed, is believed; and man 
can not say his book contains more truth than others, 
unless he understands infinite action. If man would 
have his book sold for the purpose of fame or money, 
he is seeking the sale of it from selfish considerations ; 
and he is also seeking for a dependent joy, for it may 
sell and it may not. If his book does not sell he should 
see in it his joy. Man should only seek to be faithful 
and to act from his love irrespective of all considera¬ 
tions. Man should not have an attachment for the 
result of his labors, but should seek to labor free from 
selfishness; for results always take place with reference 
to the good of all. 

Man should not seek to be a teacher and presume 
himself to be the best; and if it is of consequence to 
him whether he is a teacher or not, it wfill interrupt his 
joy. He may seek to teach the many or the few, and be 
disappointed ; therefore, he should not be attached to 
conditions in which he would teach, but only seek to be 
faithful in the manner he is called on. If he is attached 
to any method or manner in which he would teach, he 
is seeking a dependent joy. Some are to write books, 
some to speak in assemblies, and some to remain in the 
ordinary walks of life ; and one of these conditions is 
not superior to the other, except through a selfish love. 
If man is disappointed because he is not famous, — can 
not do good in the way he chooses, — he should seek for 
a new love, and seek that he may find joy in the method 
by which every thing takes place. 

Man should seek to leave all selfish desires ; and 


334 


GOD OF LIBERTY. 


this he can do, if he will have faith that they prevent 
joy. In loving he must see that his attachment for 
wealth, fame, or ease, is a selfish condition which he 
must overcome before he can be free. 

To eagerly desire or anticipate any thing, is selfish. 
The love a man has faith in he possesses in the present 
moment of his faith ; and hence, in eagerly desiring or 
anticipating, he must expect more joy in some future 
moment than he now possesses. Therefore, what man 
eagerly anticipates, must be from some selfish attach¬ 
ment, because if it were not, he would now possess it. 
It is selfish to desire any thing, — to expect more joy from 
it than is now possessed. Man can desire those things 
that seem to him a good, from his love ; but those desires 
immediately become selfish attachments, if their posses¬ 
sion or non-possession can increase or diminish his joy ; 
for all joy that does not arise from love is selfish. 


ARTICLE LXIY. 

THE GOD OF LIBERTY. 

Liberty usually means to all the privilege of doing 
as they wish. To the man who desires to become rich, 
liberty means the privilege of becoming so in a manner 
that suits his conception of honesty and protection. 
Liberty, to the one who desires to be famous, is the 
privilege of appropriating high stations in communities, 
and acting in them in a manner that will invite to his 
conception the greatest and most desirable amount of 



GOD OF LIBERTY. 


335 


praise. Liberty, to the one who seeks happiness or 
pleasure, is the privilege of seeking it as he wishes, and 
in being protected. Man is likely to suppose that 
country to be the most free that interferes least with the 
things of his desire. He is, however, often taught that 
one country is better than another, from authority. Men 
often become attached to singing songs to God, and 
hence are led to suppose that the greatest amount of 
liberty is in being allowed to sing praises all the time ; 
and that every thing that now interferes with this is 
bondage. But man has no means of proving that any 
kind of government or condition can do more to pro¬ 
duce liberty than another. 

Whatever man has faith in, his action with reference to 
it is imperative; consequently, when man has faith in 
love he will endeavor to love. But to have faith in love, 
man must believe that love and selfishness, good and 
evil, right and wrong, and every action which it is 
possible to take place, is a manifestation of love. But 
he can not arrive at this faith if he allows that man is 
any more a free agent than are the trees; for he must 
constantly feel that every action that has taken place 
should have taken place, and that every action that is to 
take place ought to take place. If any result takes 
place different from what man desires, and he does not 
immediately suppose that the result was more necessary 
than that of his desire, he can not love. He must have 
faith that every action in the universe is a manifestation 
of love. But if he allows that man is a free agent and 
accountable, he must allow that an tmnecessarjr act can 
take place, and consequently believe that all action is 
not a manifestation of love, and hence be prevented 


336 


GOD OF LIBERTY. 


from having faith in love. To say that man can love 
his neighbor whom he believes has done or can do an 
unnecessary act, is to say what is impossible. Man can 
never be free as long as he has any doubt whether free 
agency is true or not; because to have any doubts he 
must have apprehensions of unnecessary acts ; and as 
long as he allows that there is a possibility of an 
unnecessary act he can not love, because he can not have 
faith in love. Man can not have apprehensions of any 
thing to be lost or gained in the future, if he has faith 
that every thing that is to be should and must be, and 
must also be a manifestation of love. Man has no means 
of proving but he has already lived the future of his 
life as much as he has lived the past; neither can he 
show that he has any more control over the future of 
his life than over the past; and to prove that he has 
control over the future he must prove that he has control 
over the past; because he has no means of showing that 
the causes to any action lie any more in the past than in 
the future. Hence, if man would be free, he must 
endeavor constantly to feel that every thing that is to 
take place ought to take place, and will be a manifesta¬ 
tion of love; and that he has no more control over the 
future of his life than over the past. 

Man can not love any one that he believes to be 
superior or inferior to himself; consequently, man can 
never know liberty as long as he has faith in any superior 
or inferior being. To assert that there is a being in the 
universe that can love his God, if by that God is meant 
a being superior to himself, is to assert an impossibility. 
Man can form selfish attachments to beings superior and 
inferior to himself, but he can never love them; 


GOD OF LIBERTY. 


337 




because that superiority and inferiority arise to his mind 
through a selfish and dependent standard. Man can not 
love and be selfish at the same time. Love that can 
know any dependent considerations must arise from the 
selfish feelings. Man likes superior and dislikes inferior 
beings; but he can not know either except through the 
selfish feelings. With superior and inferior beings he 
can buy and sell. Consequently that being can never 
exist to the conception of man that can love a Supreme 
Being ; and whoever knows a being superior or inferior 
to himself is not free. 

Man can not love any of those conditions or things 
that arise to * his mind through selfish and dependent 
standards. Man, in asserting that he loves music, 
poetry, oratorical addresses, the style of certain authors, 
the arts of design, asserts an impossibility, for these 
things arise through selfish preferences. He may say 
he loves the refined, the pure, the holy, the righteous ; 
but if it is to be understood that he loves these better 
than others, he the same as says that he does not love 
them, but has a selfish attachment. To say that God 
hates sinners, has enemies, will punish the wicked, is 
the same as saying that God is incapable of loving. If 
man has any selfish preferences he is not free. 

Man, to have faith in love, must believe that he is in 
that condition in every moment of time that he should 
be, and must also have the same faith respecting all other 
persons and things, and must be himself free from selfish 
attachments. 

Freedom can not be dependent on any locality, or 
any of the casualties or accidents of life ; if it is, it is 
not freedom. Freedom consists in development. If 

29 


338 


GOD OF LIBERTY. 


any thing can take place to disturb the joy of a being, 
that being has not found freedom ; for the joy of the 
free can not be removed by any of the accidents known 
among men. No one place in the universe is more free 
than another. No circumstances of life can do more to 
make freedom than others. No condition of life or 
climate is better than another to give freedom. No 
society is better than another to produce it. Riches 
are not better than poverty ; palaces are not better than 
hovels ; flowers are not better than thorns ; birds are 
not better than reptiles ; music is not better than dis¬ 
cord ; health is not better than sickness ; the society of 
the pure is not better than the society of the degraded, 
to produce freedom. Freedom is joy that can not be 
interrupted. 

Why has man joy in one thing, and sorrow in an¬ 
other ? Why joy in pleasures, and sorrow in doing 
the duties of life ? Why are the calls of duty some¬ 
times vexatious, and the violating of conscience often a 
pleasure ? These things are on account of development. 
Man, in certain conditions of life, has found pleasure, 
and in consequence of having been interrupted in it, has 
been led to suppose that freedom must be in a locality 
where vexatious things do not appear Any seeking 
for such a place, is a selfish love. Troubles come to 
man for the want of faith in love, not because of condi¬ 
tion or locality He who seeks to leave any trouble of 
the world, — to leave his persecutors, or enemies, the 
sight of the sick, the dying, or the miserable, is seeking 
a selfish interest. If there is any thing that is disa¬ 
greeable to man, go where he will, he can be no nearer 
freedom until that thing is less disagreeable. If there 


GOD OF LIBERTY. 


339 


is any tiling that can annoy him, he is not free, for by 
thought or deed he is liable to annoyance. The same 
things that prevent man from finding freedom in this 
world will prevent him from finding it in the future ; 
for nothing prevents him from finding it any where, 
except his selfishness. Man may become free any 
where. 

Man can find freedom in the future world no sooner 
than here. Man is no freer from selfishness in one 
place than in another, and he would as quick seek 
selfish loves in the future as here. Freedom arises 
from love. To say that one place is superior to another 
to find it, is to say that love is partial. Freedom is 
found in all places and under all circumstances. Joy is 
equally for all. All are different; and what is for one 
is not for another. But whatever does take place with 
one, is his method of finding joy. Every being has 
qualities belonging to him which in their connections 
will make him free, but they can not belong in the 
same proportions to any other being. Man must 
change in order to possess uninterrupted joy. His 
necessities are his appointed teachers. In his toils for 
food and clothing he is called on to perfect his love ; 
amidst the adverse winds that blow he is to gather 
strength; in the duties of life he should leave his 
selfish desires. It may require more strength in some 
to give encouragement to a neglected child than to run 
the risk of death. It may require more strength to do 
faithfully the small duties of life than to do things 
called noble. All necessities that invite to action are 
messengers to bring to all their freedom. 


340 


GOD OF OPPRESSION. 


ARTICLE LXY. 

THE GOD OF OPPRESSION. 

Those who love seek freedom for others; those 
who would remain in their selfish condition must seek 
to oppress others ; for if man is seeking his own free¬ 
dom he is inviting every one to be free ; but if seeking 
his personal gratification he is himself in bondage, and 
seeking to enslave others. 

If man is seeking to throw off any burthen imposed on 
him that he may impose the same on others, he is 
seeking to become an oppressor. A man may be en¬ 
slaved ; but if in return he would practice any of those 
things on his oppressors that are practised towards him, 
he is as selfish, and is seeking to become like them. 

The oppressor is in bondage as much as the oppressed, 
for it is bondage to seek to impose burthens on others ; 
and the more selfish any action is the more uncertainty 
and fear does the actor feel. 

Man in relieving the world of oppression should not 
seek to injure the oppressors, for then he is himself an 
oppressor; but he should consider whether he is him¬ 
self taking any advantage of his neighbor, and if he is 
he should seek to be free. Man should not think that 
his method of oppression is better than others. Every 
one who oppresses must do so after the method of their 
selfish loves. When one oppresses another he invites 
all others to do acts of oppression after their method of 
doing it. Therefore, man can not teach others to be 
free unless he is himself free, for the acts of life are the 
true speeches of beings. 


GOD OF OPPRESSION. 


341 


Man should not think to relieve the world of 
oppressors by an outward change of society, for it makes 
no difference how society is governed; wherever can be 
found the selfish can be found oppressors. The chang¬ 
ing of rules do not give man a new love, although it 
may change his selfish loves into new channels. Society 
is at the present moment after the faith of the individuals 
composing it. 

Man, in endeavoring to do others good, should en¬ 
deavor to love, and the influence of his own striving 
will reach others and lead them to liberty; for whoever 
has found liberty no chains can bind, prisons contain, or 
tyrants oppress ; if they could, the joys of the free would 
be dependent. When one is striving for liberty, he 
should see all cares as his appointments to make him 
free. 

Man should not strive so much to seek the outward 
means of deliverance for the oppressed as to give to 
them liberty in the condition they now occupy. Man 
should be faithful in whatever condition placed; he 
should be as faithful over those things given into his 
hands by oppressors as over those from the free. If he 
does not do this he cannot obtain love and faith. Man 
should not be anxious about any condition of life in 
which he may be placed, for he is always in that con¬ 
dition appointed for him; and if he is selfish, let him be 
where he will he is in bondage. Man may wish to 
escape that kind of bondage that conflicts. most with his 
selfish loves, but it may be necessary that he should 
remain in that condition until he. learns to be faithful. 
The free labor to relieve men from all kinds of bondage, 
while man may be laboring to relieve himself from one 


29 * 


342 


GOD OF PUNISHMENT. 


kind that he may know another. If man has faith in 
love he will believe that all are in the condition appointed, 
and that all shall be free from their selfishness. 


ARTICLE LXYI. 

THE GOD OF PUNISHMENT. 

Punishment is supposed to be administered for the 
purpose of reformation ; and by reformation is meant that 
man should conform to a certain standard of action. 
The same selfishness that may lead man in one channel 
and cause him to be punished, may lead him in another 
channel that he may escape punishment. Man may be 
in as selfish a condition in conforming to a standard of 
action as in not conforming to it; although in one 
society may praise, and in the other administer punish¬ 
ment. Man is not worse because his selfishness leads 
him in a channel that conflicts with the laws of gov¬ 
ernment, than when his selfish feelings coincide with 
those laws. Punishment always has reference to man’s 
changing his selfish feelings. When a man steals and is 
put in prison he is told by the act that he must obtain 
money in some other way. All laws say that there are 
some methods of personal gratification that they do not 
like. When punishment is used to reform, by that 
reform is usually meant a change in the selfish feelings. 
It is no more selfish in the thief to steal than it is selfish 
in society to punish him for stealing. The thieving and 
the punishment are in consequence of the selfish attach- 



GOD OF PUNISHMENT. 


343 




merits of two conflicting parties. No child was ever 
struck in order to produce love, but because it had in¬ 
fringed on the selfish feelings of some person, and that 
it might not do the same thing again. No man was ever 
imprisoned or hung in order to produce love, but that 
society might be protected in its selfish attachments. 
But man can use restraints over his brother as an act of 
love ; but if that restraint is a penalty for past acts, it is 
an act of selfishness ; for then it is used with reference 
to protecting man in his selfish attachments. Man, to 
use restraints as an act of love over his brother, must 
have no selfish attachment for life or property, but must 
presume, having life and property, that he must be 
faithful over them. If man uses restraints over another 
because he has fears of losing his life and property, it is 
selfish. In whatever condition man finds himself he 
should be faithful as an act of love; and in using re¬ 
straints over another who would interfere by force over 
his faithfulness, he should have no selfish attachments 
for the things in his care. Man should take the same 
precaution about receiving injuries from a brother as he 
would about receiving injuries from the winds ; and he 
should not consider one any more to blame than the 
other. Punishment is inflicted because a deplored act 
has taken place ; but restraints can never be used because 
of any act of the past, but because there is danger of an 
infringement upon man’s conception of faithfulness. If 
man kills his brother, and there is no danger of his kill¬ 
ing any one else, it would be an act of selfishness in all 
who would use restraints when they supposed there was no 
further danger. All restraints or punishments that are 
inflicted with reference to past acts, are acts of selfish- 


344 


GOD OF PUBLICATIONS. 


ness. Man, in using restraints over a brother as an act 
of love, does so presuming that he must be faithful in 
the condition in which he finds himself; but if in using 
that restraint he presumes he should not be as faithful 
over the brother as over his own life and property, he 
then manifests a selfish preference. 


ARTICLE LXVII. 

THE GOD OF PUBLICATIONS. 

It is an act of selfishness to give a publication to the 
world with reference to the selfish demand of any class 
of readers. Not but a selfish demand can often be com¬ 
plied with as an act of love, but an endeavor to meet any 
selfish demand on account of remuneration, is selfish. A 
mechanic can furnish to a farmer any implement of hus¬ 
bandry he may wish as an act of love; but man can not 
furnish to a reading community from love, ideas to meet 
a selfish demand. All issuing of publications for the 
purpose of amusement are acts of selfishness, and who¬ 
ever reads them commits an act of selfishness. When 
man presumes through his publication to instruct, and 
the selfish demand of community has been sought, he is 
in the same selfish condition as a man who goes for a 
cargo of slaves or sells rum to his brothers, because 
they are articles wanted. A man who writes for a book, 
newspaper, or periodical, with reference only to its sale, 
is in the same selfish condition as was Judas Iscariot 
when he betrayed Christ. Ought a man ever to ask the 



GOD OF PUBLICATIONS. 


345 


question when he is reading a publication, whether 
its character was not determined by an endeavor to 
suit his selfish feelings ? Is the poverty of this world 
so great that publications can not be issued that would 
have any confliction with the selfish attachment of its 
readers ? What is it that is called truth and duty in 
those publications which acknowledge the God of praise 
and money ? What was any composition ever written 
worth, when the inquiry was made what the people 
would read ? What is meant by literature excepting 
the demand of all for that particular class of reading 
which they like ? What God is worshipped when an 
endeavor is made to comply with this demand, with the 
ostensible purpose of giving to the world instruction ? 
Man can comply with some selfish demands as an act of 
love, but never under any circumstances except with the 
endeavor to make that demand less. 

Does an editor of a newspaper or periodical ever 
think he has been bought, when after a free ride on the 
cars, or a steamboat, or a free dinner, he tells his patrons 
which is the best railroad and steamboat, and where is 
the best place to board ? 

Do reporters of newspapers and periodicals, when 
they speak in terms of ridicule or praise of any thing at 
the suggestion of their employers, ever suppose their 
condition to be one of slavery ? 

Ought any editors of newspapers or periodicals 
endeavor to watch for truth and falsehood during the 
time of an election ? 

How much time ought, the editors of newspapers and 
periodicals to spend over the orthography and syntax of 
letters that presume to criticise them ? 


346 


GOD OF PUBLICATIONS. 


Do the editors of newspapers and periodicals suppose 
that they are doing their God service when they convey 
to their patrons their personal prejudices ? 

Ought man to reject most all authority and accept 
his newspapers as Gods ? 

Ought man to suppose that the editor of a newspaper 
or periodical is a superior being to himself ? 

Ought man to suppose that he shall become free 
from selfish attachments if he loves the style of praise 
and ridicule which many editors, reporters, and con¬ 
tributors adopt respecting their likes and dislikes ? 

Ought religious newspapers to advocate denomina¬ 
tional pride ? 

By what standard ought religious newspapers to judge 
their cause to be in a flourishing condition ? 

By what standard ought religious partizans, news¬ 
papers, and periodicals to judge of truth and error? 

Ought a man to write a book and say that he stands 
before the bar of public opinion ? 

When a man, in writing for the public, says that he is 
writing for the judgment of the literary world ; does he 
not the same as say, if he had known what that judg¬ 
ment would have been, he would have conformed to it ? 

When a man, in writing for the public, says to his 
patrons that he intends to meet their wishes and wants, 
does not he the same as say that he would like to be 
rich or famous ? 

When a man says to the world that his newspaper or 
periodical will take the highest position as a journal, 
does he not the same as say that he considers himself 
superior to most conductors of newspapers and 
periodicals ? 


GOD OF PRESENTS. 


347 


Does it ever occur to the conductors of newspapers 
and periodicals, when they tell their patrons how 
abominable any doctrine is, that they the same as say 
that they are themselves virtuous and can be relied upon ? 

Ought a man to suppose that whatever he reads is 
infallible ? 

Ought man to suppose that information he obtains in 
newspapers, periodicals, and books, is of any more 
importance than information obtained from his neighbor ? 


ARTICLE LX VI11. 

THE GOD OF PRESENTS. 

Man gives from selfish motives when he does not 
give from his love. It is selfish to give from any 
motive of reward or notoriety ; and hence, it is selfish to 
seek to reward or to make notorious the names of those 
who give. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to thank God 
because he has received presents. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to publish in any 
journal a card of thanks for any donation or presents 
received. 

It is selfish to seek to make notorious the names of 
any persons that have made any bequests to any society 
or any institution of learning. 

It is selfish in any one to give that his name may 
come before the world. 

It is selfish in any one to say that it is better to give 
than to receive. 



348 


GOD OF CONJUGAL LOVE. 


It was selfish in St. Paul to intimate that God loved 
a cheerful giver better than any one else. 

It is selfish in any religious teacher to intimate that 
God holds in remembrance those who give to build up 
his cause. 

It is selfish in any one to intimate that man is under 
any more obligations to give in one instance than in 
another. 


ARTICLE LXIX. 

THE GOD OF CONJUGAL LOVE. 

Man can not love one being more than another, 
except through his selfish feelings. Any love that is 
exclusive is selfish. If man loves one woman more 
than another, or loves women better than men, or 
loves one child better than another ; or loves young 
better than old women, it is a selfish attachment; and 
in like manner it is a selfish attachment in woman if she 
has any preferences with respect to the opposite sex. If 
by conjugal love is meant an exclusive love of two beings 
for each other, it is selfishness. No such love can be 
demonstrated, except through the selfish feelings. Man 
or woman, to be free, should not see one being more 
than another as a wife or husband. When man selects 
one woman to be his wife exclusively, the selection is 
determined through his selfish feelings. If there is any 
conjugal love, there must be a certain method by which 
man and woman can find their mates. If man and 
woman have the power of determining that one being 
more than another should be to them as a mate, they 



GOD OF CONJUGAL LOVE. 


349 


must possess a perfect conception. Any exclusive love 
that man may have will bring fear. How near liberty 
can man and woman be when they suppose they have 
an exclusive right to one another, and that right to be 
based on some fancy of their early years. Man may 
live through a million of ages, and if he has an exclu¬ 
sive love for any one being, he will have fears respect¬ 
ing the object of that love ; for there must always be a 
possibility that his right can be infringed upon. The 
selfishness that leads man and woman to pledge them¬ 
selves to each other, leads them under different circum¬ 
stances to break their vows. When man supposes that 
one woman belongs exclusively to him, and that woman 
is taken from him, he is likely to seek for another •with 
whom to enjoy the same exclusive right. Man and woman 
in this way often have five or six different conjugal loves. 
Which one of these shall endure through eternity ? 
that one with whom man had the most happiness ? 
When ought man to determine what woman shall be 
exclusively his wife for eternity ? He can not determine 
any better one time than another ; he can not determine 
better in the future world than in this ; he can not 
determine a million of ages hence better than in the 
present age ; because he can not prove himself to be 
more perfect in one moment of time than another ; he 
can not prove but his fancy is as good now as it will be 
ages hence ; he can not prove that he should have his 
true bride any more in the future world than in this ; 
he can not demonstrate at what particular time in eternity 
he should have his true bride, and should discard his 
false brides; and if he accepts his bride because God or 

30 


350 


GOD OF CONJUGAL LOVE. 


angels tell him she is the one, it is an act of selfishness, 
for in doing this he accepts her on authority. Hence, 
if by conjugal love is meant any exclusive love or privi¬ 
lege of man and woman for each other through eternity, 
it is selfish. But man can do any thing from his love 
that he esteems a good, when there are no selfish feelings 
to influence him with reference to the action. Hence, 
man can be with one woman and know her as his bride 
from his love, providing that love is not a selfish attach¬ 
ment, and that his choice has not been determined through 
the selfish feelings. 

Man can not choose that he will have children by one 
woman in preference to all others, or woman choose that 
she will have children by one man in preference to all 
others, without being selfish. Man, legally married, 
can not prefer that he shall have children by his wife in 
preference to other women, or prefer to have children 
by other women than by his wife, without being selfish ; 
consequently, it becomes an act of selfishness in man to 
contend with any one that he should have children by 
ether women than his wife, because by so doing he man¬ 
ifests a selfish preference. Man and wife can live with 
each other from their love, when that love is not a selfish 
attachment; but they are objects of care to each other, 
and in being faithful, they can not contend that they 
should have children out of wedlock, except that 
decision arises through the selfish feelings. If man 
would contend that he should have children by others 
than his wife, it is through a selfish attachment. Woman, 
legally married, can not choose her husband in preference 
to any one else by whom to have children; neither can 
she choose any one else in preference to her husband ; 


GOD OF CONJUGAL LOVE. 351 

consequently, if the selfish feelings of society decide 
that she shall have children only by her husband, she 
can not contend that she should not, without manifesting 
a selfish preference. If woman desires to have children 
by one man in preference to another, it is selfishness, 
except that desire is based upon considerations which to 
her conception are a good. Her choice would be an act 
of selfishness if manifested through any selfish attach¬ 
ments. Woman can decide that she will not have any 
children as an act of love, but if she decides through 
selfish considerations it is an act of selfishness. Woman 
can decide with whom she would prefer to have children 
as an act of love, when that decision is based upon 
considerations that to her conception are good ; but if 
that decision is based on selfish attachments, it is an act 
of selfishness. Woman might prefer to have children 
by others than her husband as an act of love ; but in 
being faithful, she must feel appointed over her husband 
and her offspring as objects of her care ; and hence, it 
becomes selfish in her to contend with her husband or 
society, because she can not prove that she should have 
children by others in preference. 

Unmarried men and women can not be attached to 
the result whether they shall or shall not have children, 
without being selfish ; they may as an act of love, wish 
for children; but it would become selfishness in them to 
have children against the selfish attachment of all their 
brothers and sisters, because they can not show that they 
are better with children than they are without. Man 
and woman can not be anxious whether they have any 
children or not, whether married or unmarried, without 
having a selfish attachment for results. It is no more 


352 


GOD OF AFFINITY. 


selfish in the unmarried to have children than in the 
married ; but if the married or unmarried have children 
and they have not sought for them, they have committed 
acts of selfishness. 

No person can have children as acts of love until they 
have overcome every desire of indulgence. Man or 
woman can not do an act of love, when there are any 
selfish feelings that can influence them with reference to 
that action. Hence, if every desire for indulgence is 
not overcome, or if there is any necessity for using self- 
denial, no man or woman can tell which they wish for 
most, — indulgence or children. To seek for children 
as an act of love, one must be free from every desire of 
indulgence. 


ARTICLE LXX. 

THE GOD OF AFFINITY. 

What is meant by affinity but the definite manifesta¬ 
tion of some selfish attachment ? Man can discover no 
affinity for one being in the universe more than for 
another, or for any one locality of the universe more 
than for another, or for any one moment in time or 
eternity more than for another, except through the 
selfish feelings. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that he has more 
affinity for God than for Satan. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that he has more 
affinity for angels than for devils. 

It is selfish in man to receive any person as his bride 



GOD OF THE AFFECTIONS. 353 

because God, angels, the ancient dead, or devils tell him 
that she is his bride. 

It is selfish in man or woman to do for any persons 
more than for others, because they have discovered an 
affinity for them. 

Was any thing more ever meant by the “ laws of 
affinity,” “ the definite attraction ” of men and women 
for each other, or for any locality, society, or condition, 
except the seeking of selfish loves. 


ARTICLE LXXI. 

THE GOD OF THE AFFECTIONS. 

Man, by his affectionate zeal, regard, and interest, 
usually means some selfish attachment. Man may say 
that it is natural for him to have more affection for his own 
child than for that of others ; but this is saying that it 
is natural to be selfish, for it is selfish if man loves one 
child better than another. Man may mention objects, 
scenes, and persons to whom his affections cling, but 
he is only mentioning his selfish preferences. 

Man can not prove that he should exercise more care 
over one child or person than over others ; and it is 
selfishness in him to prefer one being to another to 
whom to do acts of kindness. Man must be faithful as an 
act of love in the condition in which he finds himself. 
Consequently, if man has in his care his father, mother, 
sister, brother, or child, it is an act of selfishness in him 
to prefer to care for any one else instead of them. It 
would also be an act of selfishness in him to interfere 

30 * 



354 


BLAMABLE GOD. 


with the selfish attachment of a mother for her child, 
for he can not prove that he can educate a child better 
than any one else; neither can he prove that he should 
take care of one child in preference to another. If man 
would contend about caring for his father or child, he 
shows a selfish attachment, because he can not prove 
his father or child to belong to him any more than any 
other being in the world. Whoever care for the sick, 
and would do less for them than for their nearest kin¬ 
dred, have a selfish preference. Man can not be free 
from selfish attachments until he sees in one as much as 
another a brother or sister. 


ARTICLE L X X11. 

THE BLAMABLE GOD. 

W ho is to blame ? Can man find a brother or sister 
that is to blame ? How can man prove that one act of 
selfishness is worse than another, — or that any act of 
selfishness is unnecessary, — or that an act of selfishness 
is worse than an act of love ? 

Let not man blame the professors of learning, doctors of 
divinity, preachers, captains, and generals, for the posi¬ 
tions they occupy. They are not to blame. Man can 
not prove their position to be superior or inferior to 
his own ; neither can he prove their position to be 
more false in society. 

Let not man blame the degraded or despised of any 
class. Man is not worse because his selfishness leads 



GOD OF INDUSTRY. 


355 


him in some channel that conflicts more with the selfish¬ 
ness of others. Man can not love if he finds any one 
that he can blame. One being is doing his part in the 
infinity of action as much as another. To be free, man 
must always feel that every one he meets is a brother or 
sister. 


ARTICLE LXXIII. 

THE GOD OF INDUSTRY. 

A man that is called industrious may be in as selfish 
a condition as one that is called idle ; for one may labor 
constantly, believing that he shall be happy when he is 
rich, — and the other be idle, believing that he shall be 
happy when he finds a condition in which he shall not 
be annoyed by the calls of duty. One who is laboring 
to be rich may be industrious, and neglect the calls of 
love the same as one who is called idle. But a person 
in spending his time in public places of resort is as 
industrious in following his desires as one who performs 
any kind of labor that he may attain his. Every mo¬ 
ment of time must be occupied by man ; and he can 
not prove that he does more when he remains immova¬ 
ble than when he is in motion. Man can not do more 
than to keep in action in every moment; and he can 
not do more than to refrain from action in every 
moment; and he can not prove that one condition is 
better than the other. But all the actions of man are 
voluntary ; because after once acting, he is obliged to 
perform a voluntary act in ceasing to act. Hence, after 



356 




SOCIAL GOD. 

man has once acted, every conscious moment of exist¬ 
ence is a moment of voluntary action to his consciousness. 
Man is in voluntary action as much when he is sitting in 
his chair as when he is laboring in the field ; and he may 
do both as an act of selfishness and as an act of love. 
To be free, man should seek to do in every moment of 
time acts of love. From his love he may be called on 
to labor with his hands. He should not prefer one kind 
of labor to another, or, at least, have any selfish attach¬ 
ments for one kind of labor. From his love he may be 
called on to sit in his chair, and he may be called on to 
labor in the field, and he may be called on to toil in the 
city and in the forest. To be truly industrious, man 
should act from his love constantly. 


ARTICLE LXXIY. 

THE SOCIAL GOD. 

Ilow can the social condition of man be improved ? 
If he would be free, let him learn how to love ; if he 
would be in bondage, let him refuse to give up his 
selfish attachments. Man may be more or less social, 
but is not nearer freedom unless he has relinquished 
some of his selfish attachments. Is there any thing to be 
gained by calling some of the selfish attachments of man 
a good, and endeavoring to make conditions and circum¬ 
stances so that they shall not appear to be antagonistic ? 
It is possible for two men to bring about them condi¬ 
tions so that in one moment of time their selfish feelings 



GOD OF SECRET SOCIETIES. 


357 


may not clash ; but in the next moment of time those 
conditions change, and the same motives that brought to 
their conception a unity of interests, may in the next 
moment show those interests to be dissimilar. When 
man is free, he finds himself in that social condition as good 
to him as any other ; because he can not prove there can 
be a condition superior. At whatever condition man 
may arrive, as the one condition of a unity of interests, 
that condition must change in the next moment of time. 
If man is not in the condition in every moment of time 
in which he should be, he can never be in the condi¬ 
tion in which he should ; for his conditions are constantly 
changing, and he can not prove one to be better than 
another. 


ARTICLE LXXY. 

THE GOD OF SECRET SOCIETIES. 

No body of men can organize themselves for any 
purpose, to remain as a secret society, except as an act 
of selfishness ; because it is impossible for secrecy to be 
continually used, except to protect some selfish interest 
or feeling. It is an act of selfishness in man to pledge 
himself to assist his own natural brother, sister, or child, 
in preference to others ; because he can not prove that 
one being is any more his brother, sister, or child, than 
another. Every assistance which man renders to another 
in consequence of a pledge given in a previous moment, 
is an act of selfishness ; because he acts from authority 
and not from love. Societies for mutual aid are usually 



358 


GOD OF SECRET SOCIETIES. 


based upon the principle of the Golden Rule, with ex¬ 
clusive reference to the individuals composing them. 
Men are led to suppose that w T hen they are in need of 
assistance they may not always obtain it; hence, they 
place themselves under obligations to assist each other in 
circumstances of need; and to make the object of an 
organization obtainable, its own members must be pre¬ 
ferred in preference to others ; and that they may be able 
to manifest this preference, they must have means of 
recognition unknown to others. The first act of the 
organization is an act of selfishness ; because it is 
selfish in man to suppose that he shall not be protected 
in future moments of time. The act of pledging that 
they will assist each other in preference, is an act of 
selfishness ; because the pledge is authority to act from 
in future moments of time, and will interfere with acting 
from love. Every act of assistance rendered in con¬ 
sequence of a pledge, is an act of selfishness ; because 
man does not act from his love when he acts from 
authority, or from principles of mutual aid. Every act 
of assistance that is rendered on the principle of the 
Golden Rule, is selfish. It is as selfish for man to 
assist another because under similar circumstances he 
would like to be assisted, as to act for any other selfish 
end. Man is under no obligations to assist another ; if he 
is, there would be something his due every time he ren¬ 
dered that assistance; and this due would make an act 
of love impossible. Consequently, it is an act of selfish¬ 
ness in man to suppose that when he has assisted another, 
that any one is under any obligations to assist him in 
consequence, or under similar circumstances. An act of 
love must be free from all considerations of reward. 


GOD OF SLAVERY. 


359 


Hence, every act of assistance which man renders to 
another, thinking under the same circumstances he 
would like to be assisted, is an act of selfishness ; because 
he acts from a selfish consideration and not from his love. 


ARTICLE LXXVI. 

THE GOD OF SLAVERY. 

Man may call slavery right and call it wrong from 
motives of selfishness. One may call it right because his 
ancestors called it right; another may call it right be¬ 
cause he loves the condition of ease or pleasure which 
slave labor gives. A man may call it wrong because his 
ancestors called it wrong ; another may call it wrong be¬ 
cause he has apprehensions respecting his country’s 
safety; the right and wrong in all of these instances 
arise from the selfish feelings. It is selfish in man to 
call any thing right or wrong from authority, custom, 
or usage. It is selfish in man to have an attachment for 
one condition in preference to another, or to have any 
apprehensions respecting his country’s safety. Man is 
led from his love to seek to give to others conditions 
that shall exempt them from selfish control. But one 
selfish control is not better than another. Man can not 
prove that he is in a better condition when under the 
selfish control of others than when he acts from his own 
selfish feelings. The acts of love are to free men from 
all kinds of bondage. If one being exerts control over 
the person of another for any gain or reward, it is 
selfish ; and every apology that he makes for that con- 







360 


GOD OF EXCHANGE. 


trol is an act of selfishness ; because that apology must 
arise from some selfish love or dread. Man does not act 
from love when he keep slaves because he does not 
know how to obtain a living without; neither in keep¬ 
ing slaves because it would be a loss of property to let 
them go; neither in refusing to relinquish his control 
because he has any fears of results. Hence, it is selfish 
to keep slaves, and it is also selfish in man to have 
any apprehensions respecting his country’s safety, on 
account of the existence or the non-existence of slavery. 


ARTICLE L X X V 11. * 

THE GOD OF EXCHANGE. 

Every system of exchange has its origin in the selfish 
feelings. The first person that ever owned property or 
ever used any clothing, presuming that portions of his body 
ghould not be seen, committed an act of selfishness. But 
man can not prove that it is better not to own property 
than it is to own it, or that it is better not to be clothed 
than it is to be clothed. Man can have no attachment 
for either of these conditions without being selfish. An 
exchange arises because man finds others possessing what 
he wishes. The valuation that is fixed on all articles cf 
exchange is according to the demand, and the facility of 
supplying. Hence, valuation is always fictitious and de¬ 
pendent ; and no man can prove that he was ever cheated, 
or ever obtained a good bargain. One system of ex¬ 
change is as good as another. Man might suppose that 


GOD OF EXCHANGE. 


361 


system to be best that would give to all the same profit, 
or that would give to all a living profit; but no two 
persons can define alike what would be a living profit ; 
and to say that all should have the same profit is the 
same as saying that what one man has all should have ; 
which man has no means of proving should be the case. 
It is possible that man may charge more profit for one 
article than for another as an act of love. The only 
way that man can sell as an act of love, is to charge for 
an article an amount that to his conception would afford 
him all supplies exclusive of selfish wants. Jf man 
receives any profit with reference to any of his selfish 
attachments, it is an act of selfishness. If man has a 
selfish attachment for clothing, food, or life, any profit 
that he may receive with respect to them is selfish ; 
but if he has no attachment for food, clothing, or life, 
the profit he would receive would be an act of love ; for 
it is an act of love to be faithful over the things in one’s 
care. Hence, one system of exchange is as good as 
another ; it is as correct for man to charge one hundred 
as it is ten per cent, profit; it is as correct for an article 
to go through twenty as through two hands ; but any 
system of exchange with reference to any selfish attach¬ 
ment, is an act of selfishness. If man would make 
exchanges that he might become rich, famous, escape the 
performance of some labor, live in a more fashionable 
street, it would be an act of selfishness. It is the duty 
of man to care for those who are placed in his charge ; 
but he can not do so as an act of love, if he has a selfish 
attachment for them. If man can receive one dollar as 
an act of love, he can receive a million of dollars as an 
act of love. But if it would give him any more joy to 


31 


362 


GOD OF EXCHANGE. 


receive a million of dollars than to receive one, it would 
be an act of selfishness. 

It is impossible for man to seek to engage in the 
exchange of those articles, which to his conception supply 
a selfish demand, from his love. Man can trade in all 
kinds of garments, fashionable and unfashionable, from 
his love, because he cannot prove that a fashionable gar¬ 
ment is any worse than an unfashionable one ; but if he 
would seek to sell any thing that to his conception is of 
no use, it is selfishness. If man would purchase any 
articles. which to his conception are of no use for the 
purpose of trade, it is an act of selfishness. It is also 
an act of selfishness in man to trade in articles which to 
his conception are used for pleasure or amusement. 
For man to make exchanges as an act of love, he must 
not supply any demand for the purpose of his own self¬ 
ish interests. Man should have no attachment for the 
remuneration he receives at any time. 

It is selfish in man to invent any thing with reference 
to a selfish demand, or with reference to creating a new 
demand, which he can not know to be superior. It is 
an act of selfishness in man to seek to change the style 
of houses, carriages, or clothing, wfith reference to 
creating a new demand. Exchanges are made more 
frequently in consequence of fictitious demands. If 
the world has a selfish attachment for the fashion, it be¬ 
comes an object of selfish interest to those who make 
exchanges to have that fashion change as often as pos¬ 
sible. It is likely that clothing, if man had never had 
an attachment to remuneration, would never have 
changed in style, if it had been used at all. 


GOD OF POLITICAL PARTIES. 363 


ARTICLE LXXVIII. 

THE GOD OF POLITICAL PARTIES. 

For man to seek to organize any political party is 
selfish, because that organization must depend upon the 
consent of individuals to act in a certain manner in the 
future. No one can seek to pledge another to a certain 
course in the future, except through a selfish attachment. 
One man may feel that a certain course of action is of 
more importance than all others for his country ; but it 
is selfish in him to presume that all others should think 
as himself. It is possible for man to invite his country¬ 
men to vote in a certain manner from his love, because 
the effect to his conception would be a good ; but if he 
has any selfish interest or attachment for that effect, 
every act of inviting others to vote with reference to it 
is an act of selfishness. Man can act with a political 
party as an act of love ; but if he gives any pledge to 
act in the future, it is selfishness ; because in acting 
from a pledge he can not act from his love. It is possi¬ 
ble for a man to be a candidate for office as an act of 
love; hut if he has any selfish interest or attachment for 
the office, he can not seek it except as an act of selfish¬ 
ness. Every pledge man gives with reference to what 
shall be his course if an office is obtained, is an act of 
selfishness. It is selfish in any candidate to say that he 
will conform to the wishes of his party or of his con¬ 
stituents, or to adopt any standard or principles of action 
for the future that any number of men may propose to 
him. The selfish feeling that will lead a man to pledge 
himself to any party will lead him to betray them. If 


364 


CONSCIENTIOUS GOD. 


man yotes for a person who has pledged himself, he 
ought not to suppose that person to be any worse than 
previously if he violates his pledge and becomes a traitor 
to him. 


ARTICLE L X XIX . 

THE CONSCIENTIOUS GOD. 

The “ stings of remorse,” “ the guilty conscience,” 
arise to man in consequence of his deploring the effects 
of previous actions. Man often deplores his fits of 
anger and impatience ; and consequently, all effects that 
result from them that to him are not good, give grief. 
Man may intend an effect which he usually believes to 
be evil, and it may become a good ; and in the propor¬ 
tion that he would grieve over the evil effect he would 
rejoice over the good. It is an act of selfishness for 
man to rejoice over one effect more than another, or to 
grieve over one more than another. It is selfish in man 
to deplore any past effects or actions. The grief of man 
over any past effects will be in proportion to his 
present selfish attachments. Man may, in looking over 
the past, see where he has acted from selfish motives, 
and call the effect from those acts evil; but he can not 
prove a past act of selfishness to be an unnecessary act; 
neither can he prove that the effects that he calls evil 
are any more evil than good ; consequently, all grief 
that he may have respecting the past, is in consequence 
of actions and effects conflicting with his present selfish 



CONSCIENTIOUS GOD. 


365 


attachments. A man may have deprived the poor of 
their inheritance, and he may now perceive that his 
motives were selfish, and that it is an effect he would 
not now seek. But if he grieves over that effect and 
selfishness of the past, it is in consequence of a selfish 
attachment to the opposite effect, that the poor may 
always have their inheritance. It is as selfish in man to 
be attached to the result that the poor shall always be 
fed as to the result that they shall not always be fed. 
Man may, as an act of love, endeavor to give to the 
poor their inheritance; but if he has an attachment for 
that result, it is selfish, because he may not be able to 
feed the poor, although he may make the endeavor. 
Hence, any remorse respecting any action of the past is 
an act of selfishness, because that remorse can not take 
place, except it conflict with some present selfish attach¬ 
ment. Every act of man in a condition of selfishness, 
is an act of selfishness ; but man is not likely to grieve 
over every act of his life, but over those acts, the effects of 
which he dislikes. In this way man may grieve over an act 
of intended good, for the result may be to his conception 
an evil. Man may intend a good, and his name go to 
posterity as a traitor ; but it is selfishness in him to 
grieve over that act of intended good because the effect 
was different than anticipated; and he can have no 
grief with respect to the act, except through a selfish 
attachment to results. Man may intend and do his 
brother an injury ; it is an act of selfishness in him to 
grieve over that injury, because he can not prove it to 
have been an unnecessary act, and his grief must be in 
consequence of an attachment to the result, that his 
brother never shall receive injuries. 


31 * 


366 


GOD OF SCHOOLS. 


Every act of repentance which takes place through 
tears, fasting, and prayer, is selfish, because these con¬ 
ditions indicate only a change in the selfish feelings. 
What man has conception of as a good, creates the 
standard called conscience. But this conscience is a 
selfish love until man is free from selfish attachments. 
Man may be often led to say that certain acts conflict with 
his conscience when they conflict with his selfish feel¬ 
ings. The voice of conscience is the-influence from the 
standard of action by which man determines a thing to 
be good or evil; and that standard is selfish and 
dependent until love and conscience mean the same 
thing. 


ARTICLE LXXX. 

THE GOD OF SCHOOLS. 

Those who teach should teach from their love. It is 
selfish in any one who has a child to give it to the care 
of any teacher, unless it is presumed that the teacher 
can care for the child with a love more free from selfish 
attachments. To send children to school because they 
are in the way, or because the parents have no 
time to teach them, is an act of selfishness. If 
man has a child in his care, he can not prove that 
he can do any thing of more importance than to teach 
it. Should man spend his time in becoming rich 
and send his child to school ? If parents think 
they love their children best, it is selfishness in them to 
permit their children to be in the care of others, unless 



GOD OF SCHOOLS. 


367 

they are by sickness unable to care for them ? Will it 
be said that some teachers are educated, and are better 
capable of teaching than the parents ? If joy is better 
than misery, a million of years in the possession of all 
that this world ever called education, is not worth one mo¬ 
ment of love free from selfish attachments. Why do 
not the guardians and parents of children endeavor to 
teach them how to love ? Love does not change in 
every moment of time, and is not different in every in¬ 
dividual. It is selfish in any one to permit a child 
to be in the care of others, that is first given into their 
charge, when they can care for it themselves. 

It is an easy thing to teach children how to love. 
When the parents commit an act of selfishness the 
children are invited to be selfish. Parents should never 
do or say any thing to their children for their personal 
gratification. Every word of baby talk to an infant, is 
an act of selfishness, and the first word of baby talk that 
it hears, is the commencement of its selfish education. 
Every fondling, caressing, kissing, and singing to in¬ 
fants, is selfish, and lays the commencement of a 
restless, nervous, and irritable disposition. Why will 
not parents let their infant children be? Are infants 
for the personal gratification of parents ? An infant 
should be cared for as an act of love; and any thing 
more than supplying its needs is selfish, and done for 
the personal gratification of those doing it. If an in¬ 
fant nestles and laughs in its cradle, for what purpose can 
any one take it from its resting place to fondle and caress 
it ? 

It is selfish to give to a child any playthings, because 
they are always given for some selfish purpose, and 


368 


GOD OF SCHOOLS. 


because they foster selfish attachments in the child. The 
education of children is not to teach them selfish 
attachments, but to teach them to love. 

It is selfish to command a child to do any thing ; 
because the wishes and feelings of a child are as much 
to be respected as that of any being in the universe. 

It is selfish to apply any names to children that are 
not applied to grown people; for by so doing they are 
treated as inferior beings. 

It is selfish to play any tricks with children, or to 
use any deception towards them, or to do any thing to 
make them laugh or weep, or to excite their fancy or 
wonder. 

It is selfish to teach a child there is a Supreme Being ; 
or that there are any beings superior or inferior to itself. 

It is selfish to praise or blame a child for anything it 
ever done. 

It is selfish to threaten a child with any punishment. 

It is selfish to teach a child to be amused with any 
thing. 

If man praises and blames a child, the child will praise 
and blame others ; if a man commands a child, the child 
will command others ; if a man whips a child, the child 
will whip others ; if man makes a child promise to be 
good, the child will make others promise to be good; if 
a man threatens a child, the child will threaten others. 


GOD OF SPIRITUAL MEDIUMS. 369 


ARTICLE L X X X I. 

THE GOD OF SPIRITUAL MEDIUMS. 

It is an act of selfishness in mediums to permit their 
actions or speech to be controlled by God, angels, odd 
force, superior intelligences, or the devil. If it is allow¬ 
able for God to control the actions and speech of another, 
it is allowable for the devil; if it is allowable for the 
angels, it is allowable for demons ; if it is allowable for 
superior intelligences, it is allowable for inferior intelli¬ 
gences. Whoever permit themselves to be controlled, 
are selfish in preferring God to the devil, Christ to 
Judas Iscariot, angels to demons. If a superior intelli¬ 
gence controls the speech of another, it is an act of self¬ 
ishness for that superior intelligence to do any thing to 
prevent an inferior intelligence from controlling the same 
speech. It is selfish for any being to presume that he is in¬ 
ferior or superior to any one. Hence, whoever permits their 
organs of speech to be controlled, must subject them¬ 
selves to mercenary and selfish influences. It is selfish 
in mediums to permit any one to control their speech for 
any purpose ; because in so doing, they are obliged to 
presume that the being is superior to themselves, and 
they are obliged to presume that the intelligence should 
speak while they lose their personal identity. To be¬ 
lieve that one being is superior to another is selfish, 
because it can not be proved; to presume that any being 
should loose their personal identity and act and speak 
for another is selfish, because they relinquish their own 
consciousness to adopt the consciousness of a foreign 
influence. Man should be faithful over himself as an act 


370 GOD OF SPIRITUAL MEDIUMS. 

of love; through his consciousness he is educated and 
acts ; if it is allowable for him to relinquish this con¬ 
sciousness to another for one moment, it is allowable for 
him to relinquish it in all moments. Hence, if it is 
allowable for a superior intelligence to control the speech 
and actions of a medium in one moment, it is allowable 
for the same intelligence to control the speech and 
actions of a medium through eternity. Man can not 
relinquish his consciousness as an act of love ,* because 
finding himself with the consciousness of the power to 
will and to do, to be free, he should seek to be faithful 
in the exercise of it. It is as selfish in man to give up 
his personal identity as it is to give up his life. He 
finds himself a living and conscious being; and it is as 
selfish to give up his consciousness to another for a few 
moments as for eternity. To prove that one is a good 
is to prove that the other is a good. 

It is an act of selfishness in God, Christ, odd force, 
the venerable dead, or the devil, to seek to control the 
actions and speech of any mediums. For any intel¬ 
ligence to control the actions and speech of a medium, 
must presume the medium to be inferior to itself; and 
hence, must seek that control through some mercenary 
or selfish interest. As an act of love no being can con¬ 
trol the speech and actions of another, except in instances 
of complying with a selfish demand with the desire to 
make that demand less. It is an act of selfishness in 
any intelligence in the future world to presume that it 
can do more good than any one in this world; and 
hence, it is selfish in any intelligence to presume that 
its identity is of more value to this world than the 
identity of the medium through whom it speaks. An 


GOD OF SPIRITUAL MEDIUMS. 371 


intelligence that is selfish enough to prefer its own iden¬ 
tity to that of the medium’s, will be selfish enough to 
prefer its own ideas to the conceptions of superior 
and inferior intelligences who might wish to control the 
same medium. If God, Peter, odd force, or the devil, 
control mediums, it is possible for them to form a selfish 
attachment to them, the same as man does for his prop¬ 
erty and his wives. 

It is selfish in mediums to seek to devote their time 
to teaching that the dead can talk with the living, 
because by so doing they are not acting from their love. 

It is selfish in mediums to speak “ by impression ” 
any thing which they do not feel to be truth; for the 
selfishness that will permit this will permit them to 
lend themselves to promote the selfish ends of any person. 

It is selfish in a medium ever to speak by “im¬ 
pression,” if by it is meant any thing different than the 
medium’s own conception of truth; because for a /' 
medium to teach any thing different from his or her 
conceptions of truth, is being led and teaching others 
to be led by authority. 

It is selfish in any intelligence, here or in the future 
world, to teach through a medium any thing the medium 
does not believe, or any thing that would conflict with 
the medium’s selfish attachments; for no intelligence 
can prove that love is better than selfishness, or joy 
better than misery; and hence, the medium who teaches 
what he does not believe, or what conflicts with his selfish 
attachments, saying that it comes from some one else, acts 
from authority ; and whoever seeks to have any medium 
teach what he does not believe, or what conflicts with his 
selfish attachments, is seeking to teach by authority. 


372 


GOD OF PUBLIC OPINION. 


ARTICLE L XXX11. 

THE GOD OF PUBLIC OPINION. 

Man usually understands by public opinion liis 
conception of the general usage or custom of those 
about him. Hence, public opinion is authority to all 
who act from it, supposing it to point out a superior 
method. Man may conform to public opinion from his 
love ; but in doing so, he must not be influenced by any 
selfish considerations. Man can conform to the custom 
of dress as an act of love; but if he has an attachment 
to one kind of dress, or has a selfish preference whether 
he is clothed or not, it is an act of selfishness. The act 
of love in his conforming to a particular kind of dress, 
consists in the deference he pays to the attachment of 
others. But as an act of love he could not show this 
deference to the attachment of others, if he was able to 
prove that one kind of dress was superior to another. 
Man may conform to public opinion with respect to 
marriage as an act of love ; but if he supposes the woman 
he marries any more belongs to him than to any one else, 
or if he has an attachment for the marriage institute, it 
is an act of selfishness. He has no means of proving 
that one woman is any more his wife than another. But 
the act of love consists in being married to conform to 
the attachment of others ; but in conforming to this 
attachment, he must not be influenced by any selfish 
interests. But man can not conform to public opinion 
as an act of love, if there are any selfish considerations 
to influence him. He can not seek to celebrate any 
public day, because in so doing he prefers moments and 


GOD OF EXPEDIENCY, ETC. 373 

events. Man can prove that it was an act of selfishness 
in the first person that claimed any property as his own, 
but he can not prove that it is selfish in man now to 
claim and own property. But if man has attachment for 
property, — is anxious whether he shall retain it in the 
next moment of time, it is selfish. Hence, man can 
conform to public opinion from his love, when in so 
doing he is not influenced by any selfish considerations 
or attachments. 


ARTICLE LXXXIII. 

THE GOD OF EXPEDIENCY. 

By expediency is usually meant the conforming to 
some demand conflicting with prevalent ideas of justice 
or good. But man may deem every thing that he does ' 
expedient. What is called expedient may be an act of 
love or selfishness. That act of expediency in which 
man is influenced by any selfish feelings, is an act of 
selfishness ; in which he acts from love is an act of love. 


ARTICLE LXXXIV. 

THE GOD OF SELFISH TEACHING. 

It is selfish to teach there is a God. It is selfish to 
teach there is no God, when the object is to remove 
obstacles to selfish desires. 




It is selfish to teach that God should be worshipped. 
It is selfish to teach that God should not be worshipped, 
if the reason for so teaching is because the prevalent 
ideas of God conflict with some selfish interest or desire. 

It is selfish to teach men to adhere to the Golden 
Rule. It is selfish to teach men not to adhere to the 
Golden Rule, when the object is to release men from the 
calls of duty. 

It is selfish to teach the practice of patience, self- 
denial, or self-sacrifice. It is selfish to teach that 
patience, self-denial, or self-sacrifice should not be 
practised, when the object is to remove obstacles to 
selfish desires. 

It is selfish to teach that the Bible is an inspired book. 
It is selfish to teach that the Bible is not an inspired 
book, when the object is to remove obstacles to selfish 
desires. 

It is selfish to teach that Christ is the son of God. It 
is selfish to teach that Christ is not the son of God, 
when the object is to remove obstacles to selfish desires. 

It is selfish to teach that there are any sacred-days. 
It is selfish to teach that there are not any sacred days, 
when the object is to remove obstacles in the way of 
selfish desires. 

It is selfish to teach that men should be ordained to 
preach the Gospel. It is selfish to teach that men 
should not be ordained to preach the Gospel, when the 
object is to excite prejudices against preachers, doctors 
of divinity, bishops, and elders. 

It *is selfish to teach that one kind of education is 
superior to another. It is selfish to teach that one kind 
of education is not superior to another, when the object 




GOD OF ORGANIZATIONS. 375 

is to excite prejudices or to remove obstacles in the way 
of selfish desires. 

It is selfish to teach that the marriage institute is of 
divine origin, or that a man and woman exclusively 
belong to each other. It is selfish to teach that the 
marriage institute is not of divine origin, or that a man 
and woman do not exclusively belong to each other, 
when the object is to remove obstacles in the way of the 
indulgence of passions. 

It is selfish to teach that man has an exclusive right 
to property. It is selfish to teach that man has not an 
exclusive right to property, when the object is to remove 
obstacles in the way of obtaining property for selfish 
gratification or pleasure. 

It is selfish to teach that men should seek for riches 
or fame. It is selfish to teach that man should not be 
rich or famous. 

It is selfish to seek to be called a doctor of divinity or 
captain. It is selfish to refuse to be called doctor of 
divinity or captain. 


ARTICLE LXXXY. 

THE GOD OF ORGANIZATIONS. 

It is usually supposed that organizations can exercise 
privileges that do not belong to individuals. It is in 
consequence of this that there arises to the mind of 
man a power and protection in organizations b&yond 
that which he is capable of possessing from his own 
independent action. 


v 



376 


GOD OF ORGANIZATIONS. 


It is supposed to be right for governments to make 
war ; to take reprisals on the property of nations or 
individuals; and to take the life of citizens, or to 
imprison them ; while it is supposed wrong for an 
individual to do the same. But the assassin is no more 
a murderer than the government that takes the life of 
one of its citizens, or the many lives of a belligerent 
nation. The highwayman is no more a thief than the 
government that makes reprisals. If it is right for 
governments to kill and imprison when they think 
necessary, it is right for the individual to kill and 
imprison when he thinks necessary. If it is right for 
nations to make laws and to punish the offenders of 
them, it is right for every individual to make laws and 
to punish the offenders of them. Is there an organized 
government existing that punishes an individual but it 
has itself been guilty of the same offense ? Increased 
quantities are supposed to be of more consequence than 
diminished ones ; hence, a thousand men are supposed 
to be of more importance than one. But the importance 
of a thousand individuals over one arises from the selfish 
feelings. An individual says that he will protect his 
life and property ; nations say that they will protect 
the lives and property of all their citizens in the aggre¬ 
gate. Every individual to suppose a government neces¬ 
sary, must suppose that every one is a robber excepting 
himself; for when he prefers an exclusive right to 
any thing, he invites all the world to rob him. With 
the first act of selfishness commences his fears. When 
man appropriates to his exclusive use what he has no 
means of proving to be his, he is obliged to suppose 
that every one will seek to do the same ; for it is impos- 


GOD OF ORGANIZATIONS. 


377 




sible for him to judge the world, except through his 
standard of selfishness. Hence, a man that sees the 
necessity of a government, sees all the world as robbers. 
Man seeks protection for his acts of selfishness, and dis¬ 
covers that he is more likely to retain what is in his 
possession from the selfish desires of others, by forming 
an agreement with a large body of men whose selfish 
interests are the same as his own. But the man that 
appropriates to his uses what he feels there is danger of 
losing, could never organize a government, except he 
found others in the same selfish condition. But the 
organization of a government presumes that one indi¬ 
vidual shall act for the many ; and this individual is 
placed in the same selfish condition as the rest, although 
it is presumed that he will not act so much for the selfish 
interest of himself as for others. But a man who sees 
the inalienable rights of others, must see them through 
some standard that to him is an object of preference. 
A man who sees the protection of property an inaliena¬ 
ble right in others, must see the protection of property 
an inalienable right in himself. And in seeing a 
thousand men more important than one, he must see a 
thousand dollars more important than one ; conse¬ 
quently, when the many tell one man to act for their 
selfish interests, he must see that the selfish interest of 
the many are more important than the selfish interests 
of one, and that a thousand dollars are more important 
than one ; and he must see that the same amount of 
selfish interest is of equal importance ; hence, no one 
is fit for any position of trust in a government until he 
has learned to be selfish. 

When a government is organized for the purpose of 

32 * 


378 


GOD OF ORGANIZATIONS. 


extending to all equal rights and privileges, the act of 
organization is a denial of the contemplated end ; for 
every government is to deny equal rights and privileges 
instead of an endeavor to extend them. Government is 
for the purpose of depriving the masses of inheriting the 
earth, because its organization is on the principle that a 
thousand dollars are of more importance than one. The 
man that owns his thousands of acres must be protected. 
Equal rights and privileges is to confer upon every man 
an equal claim to every thing, which is the same as say¬ 
ing that no man has any claim to any thing. But man can 
not prove that an act of selfishness is superior or inferior to 
an act of love; and it becomes an act of selfishness in 
one man to endeavor to dispossess another of any thing 
by force when influenced by selfish considerations. The 
free can find no government that can annoy them, 
because they have no means of proving that the man 
that owns a thousand acres of land is in a better condi¬ 
tion than the beggar, except through the selfish feelings. 
They can not be protected, or deprived of any thing. 
A robber who finds it disreputable to kill and to make 
reprisals on single individuals at a time, becomes anxious 
to have his acts legalized and called inalienable rights; 
consequently, as soon as he is able to gather about him 
a sufficient multitude of the same opinion as himself, 
the acts are called right on account of the number 
brought together whose selfish interests are the same. 

All who seek selfish interests will be likely to seek to 
identify themselves with organizations ; for organizations 
are for the/purpose of perpetuating selfish interests; and 
whoever are invited to act for organizations are invited 
to act in a selfish manner. But the selfishness of an 


GOD OF FACTS. 


379 



organization is not worse than the selfishness of an indi¬ 
vidual, because increased quantities can not be proved 
to be of more importance than diminished ones. 


ARTICLE LXXXYI. 

THE GOD OF FACTS. 

Man can not demonstrate any thing to be a fact 
or a truth. Man can not demonstrate his own ex¬ 
istence to be a fact, — that man does exist, is a fact to 
his consciousness ; hence, man assumes that he does 
exist because he is conscious of existence. By facts 
are usually meant the existence and occurrences of things 
of which man is conscious. By truth is usually meant 
that standard which man esteems the best to supply him 
with motives to action. Truth is supposed to be based 
upon facts, and also to be facts. Man’s existence is a 
fact; that love will give joy, and selfishness misery, is 
a truth which arises from existence; hence, it is also a 
fact. But man can not prove there is any such thing 
as love or selfishness; but his consciousness of these is 
as certain as the consciousness of existence. Man being 
finite can not prove any thing to be a fact or a truth; 
but finding himself a conscious being, he assumes his 
existence to be a fact. This being allowed, the same 
consciousness must tell man of other facts. Man find¬ 
ing that he exists, finds that every thing about him 
exists. Man can not prove his existence ; neither can 
he prove the existence of any thing he meets ,* neither 



380 


G OD OF FACTS. 


can he prove that all the actions of infinity are con¬ 
nected with each other; yet these are facts equal to the 
consciousness of existence. He is as conscious of the 
existence of every thing he meets as he is conscious 
of his own existence ; and he is as conscious that every 
thing of which he has a knowledge is connected with his 
existence as he is conscious of existence. 

It is selfish in man to assume any thing to be a fact 
from which to demonstrate truth, except that fact arises 
from the consciousness. If it is a fact that does not arise 
from the consciousness, it must be selfish and depend¬ 
ent. It is selfish to assume the existence of God, and 
from it demonstrate what is truth, because that existence 
is not a fact of the consciousness. Truth must be 
demonstrated from facts that pertain to the conscious¬ 
ness, or they are selfish and dependent. As the exist¬ 
ence of God is not a fact of the consciousness, it can 
only be among those facts of which man requires infor¬ 
mation in order to know them. Man must be informed 
that there is such a being as God, Christ, Caesar, 
or Alexander. The existence of God is as dependent to 
man as the existence of Alexander; and the existence 
of Christ as dependent as that of Caesar. It is selfish 
in man to prefer the existence of Caesar to that of Christ, 
or Alexander to that of God, as points from which to dem¬ 
onstrate truth ; because the existence of Alexander and 
Caesar stand in the same relation to man as facts as that of 
God and Christ; man would have no knowledge of them 
unless told of their existence. It is selfish in man to sup¬ 
pose that his present and future moments of joy are de¬ 
pendent on his being informed of an event, or the exist¬ 
ence of a being of which he has no consciousness. A mil- 


GOD OF FACTS. 


381 


lion of probabilities do not amount to a fact equal to tbe 
consciousness of existence. Man can not adopt any 
standard based on his consciousness, and prove that 
• there was ever such a being as Christ ; neither can he 
prove that what Christ is reported to have said, ever 
came from his lips. That there was such a being as 
Christ is a probability ; but it is selfish to say that this 
probability or fact of the past, is a point from which to 
demonstrate truth ; because man can not show that he 
should demonstrate truth from the existence of 
Christ any more than from the existence of millions of 
beings of whom he has no knowledge. The facts of 
consciousness are as certain to man as his existence, and 
they are certain to all beings in all periods of time. But 
the fact that there was such a being as Christ or Caesar, 
is not as certain to man as his existence ; neither is it 
certain to all beings in all periods of time. It is prob¬ 
able that a majority of beings that have lived on the 
earth never heard of Christ or Caesar. Man has no 
conception of any being living on the earth, without that 
being possessing a consciousness of existence, and con¬ 
sequently, a consciousness of joy and misery. Man is 
not faithful in the condition in which he finds himself, 
when he presumes that a fact of the past, with which 
there is an uncertainty whether he becomes acquainted, 
is as necessary to his joy as are those facts of which he 
has a knowledge in common with every being that 
exists. 

If there is a God, it is a fact of which man needs to 
to be informed ; or a fact which he is obliged to assume 
without being conscious of it. Man can have no 
faith in love if he believes that the most important 


382 GOD OF FREE LOVE, ETC. 

fact is dependent on circumstances. It is simply the 
accident of birth that tells man of a Christian’s God. It 
is not the accident of birth that tells man he is a con¬ 
scious being; or that tells him of joy and misery. % 
Through eternity there may be beings who may never 
hear of God, Christ, or Caesar; but there will be no 
intelligences but what will know of their own existence, 
and also have a conception of love and selfishness. Man, 
to be faithful, must demonstrate truths from facts that 
arise to his consciousness, which he possesses in common 
with all beings. 


ARTICLE LXXXVII. 

THEGOD OF FREE LOVE. 

If free love is allowable in the marriage institute, it 
is allowable out of the marriage institute. If it is allow¬ 
able for one man and woman to set themselves apart for 
the indulgence of passions, it is allowable for a thousand 
men and women to set themselves apart for the indul¬ 
gence of passions. Hence, every individual who marries 
for the sake of indulgence, or seeks sexual intercourse 
for personal gratification in or out of the marriage insti¬ 
tute, is an advocate of free love. 


ARTICLE LXXXYIII. 

THE GOD OF THE STRIVING. 

If man would be free he should never cease striving ; 
and his striving should never be delayed from any present 




GOD OF PUBLIC SPEAKERS. 


383 


moment of liis existence. If he has committed one 
selfish act he should not think that he will commit 
another ; but should think that to commit another will 
prevent joy. In every instance of vain and trifling 
thoughts, the striving should say to themselves that they 
prevent joy. 

In every instance of selfish loves or desires, the striv¬ 
ing should say to themselves that they prevent joy. 


ARTICLE L X X XIX. 

THE GOD OF PUBLIC SPEAKERS. 

Whoever addresses an assembly of individuals from 
any motive excepting that of love, must be actuated by 
selfishness. Hence, it is selfish in any one to seek to be 
a public speaker because he thinks he shall attract atten¬ 
tion, please the masses, or invite praise. It is selfish in 
any one to seek to be a public speaker because he thinks 
he can obtain a better living in that way than in any 
other. By a public speaker is implied a person who 
seeks to instruct others. But for man to say he will 
give instruction because he can best please those who 
would be taught, shows an intention of acknowledging 
the preferences by which he is called superior. 

It is selfish in any one to seek to hear a public speaker 
because he is an “ elegant orator,” “ a noble worker in 
God’s vineyard,” “an inspired teacher from the higher 
life,” “ has carried off the palm in our city,” “ a superior 
evangelist of Gospel truth.” If man would go to hear 



38 I 


G OD OF COURTSHIP. 


a speaker for any of those purposes, he is likely to meet 
with disappointment. Man should not seek to hear a 
public speaker, except from his love. If man seeks joy 
instead of misery, all knowledge or information that has 
no reference to this freedom is valueless. 


ARTICLE XC. 

THE GOD OF COURTSHIP. 

No one ever wept, laughed, or was made insane, or 
was disappointed, through love. Whoever professes a 
deep and ardent love for one of the opposite sex, tells 
the strength of his or her selfish feelings. Women will 
never make mistakes if they reject all ardent and passion¬ 
ate lovers. An ardent lover will change his selfish 
attachments into other channels when the causes which 
influence his selfish feelings are removed. They are 
diligent in their attentions according to the strength of 
their selfishness. But these attentions must usually 
be bestowed with reference to influential connexions, 
wealth, or indulgence. A man that is strongly influenced 
by any one or all of these, will profess a strong and 
ardent love, which ardent love is a selfish feeling. Men 
who are influenced to marry through the desire of 
indulgence, will be influenced to select those with whom 
they can enjoy most. Remove from all ardent lovers 
wealth, influential connexions, and indulgence, or other 
considerations that influence their selfish feelings, and 
every thing they call love vanishes. 



GOD OF EXAMPLE, ETC. 


385 


For what purpose does a man marry, when he leaves 
the old and feeble in his charge to the care of others, in 
order that he may bestow his attentions upon a wife ? 

For what purpose does a woman marry, if she is 
anxious whether she shall ever be subjected to the care 
of children ? 

What is meant by courtship except that man and 
woman are to be alone to pander to each others passions ? 


ARTICLE XCX. 

THE GOD OF EXAMPLE. 

Ir is selfish in any one to endeavor to set an example 
for others to follow; for by so doing he is endeavoring to 
teach by authority. 

It is selfish in any one to endeavor to follow the 
example of another; for by so doing he is acting from 
authority. 

It is selfish in any one to seek to follow the example 
of Jesus Christ. It is selfish to teach that the example 
of Christ should be followed. 


ARTICLE XCII. 

THE DIVORCED GOD. 

It is not an act of selfishness to seek to be released 
from oppression, except the release is sought from selfish 
considerations. Divorces are not unfrequently sought 

83 




386 


GOD OF SYMPATHY. 


because one of the parties likes some one else better. 
Those who call their selfish attachments loves, frequently 
learn after marriage that they have made a mistake. 
Man can not seek release from the care of his wife as an 
act of love, except it shall appear to him that it will be 
better for his wife and for himself. But this judgment 
of what he would call better, must not be based on any 
of the selfish feelings. Man shows a selfish attachment 
if he finds he likes some one better than his wife ; if he 
is disappointed because his wife does not appear so well 
in society ; if he is disappointed because she does not 
evince the j udgment and intellect he expected. Man and 
woman can not separate from their love if they suppose 
they are to love less in the future than they have loved 
previously. It is selfish in man to seek to retain a 
woman as his wife who seeks to leave him ; and it is 
selfish in man to seek to be released from his wife if she 
wishes to remain with him ; for whatever may be her 
condition, he can not prove that he can do any thing 
better than to care for her. Love and the acts of love 
apply to man with regard to his wife as they apply to 
him with regard to any being that is in his care. 


ARTICLE XCIII. 

THE GOD OF SYMPATHY. 

It is selfish in man to sympathize with any one. 

Sympathy implies that some evil or injury has befallen 
a brother or sister; while it is selfish to suppose that 
any injury or evil can befall any one. Sympathy 
implies partiality or regret. 



GOD OF SORROW 


ETC. 


387 


ARTICLE XCIY. 

THE GOD OF SORROW. 

It is selfish in man to regret having done any thing 
in the past. 

It is selfish in man to regret any of the acts of himself 
or others in the past. 

It is selfish in man to grieve over those acts, the 
result of which he or others have deplored. 

It is selfish in man to have any godly sorrow. 

It is selfish in man to have any ungodly sorrow. 

It is selfish in man to regret any action of infinity 
that ever took place. 

It is selfish in man to anticipate that any thing can 
be done different from what it should. 

It is selfish in man to grieve over the wickedness of 
the world. 

It was selfish in God to grieve about the wickedness 
of the world. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to weep over Jerusalem. 

It is selfish in preachers to weep or sigh because 
sinners do not repent or join the church. 


ARTICLE XCY. 

THE BETTER GOD. 

As man can not prove that one act more than another 
is a manifestation of love, he can not prove that one 
more than another does the will of infinite 


person 



388 


GOD OF DISPRAISE. 


action ; for to prove that one act is not a manifestation 
of love, is to prove that all action is not a manifestation 
of love. 

The acts of slaves are as much a manifestation of 
love as the acts of tyrants. 

The acts of selfishness are as much a manifestation of 
love as the acts of love. 

The acts of harlots are as much a manifestation of 
love as the acts of church members. 

The acts of oppressors are as much a manifestation of 
love as the acts of philanthropists. 

The acts of Judas Iscariot were as much a manifesta¬ 
tion of love as were the acts of Jesus Christ. 

The acts of the devil are as much a manifestation of 
love as the acts of God. 

Hell is as much a manifestation of love as heaven. 

Misery is as much a manifestation of love as joy. 


. ARTICLE X C V I. 

THE GOD OF DISPRAISE. 

It is selfish in man to do or say any thing that would 
impair his own faith or that of others in love, or that 
every thing that takes place is a manifestation of love. 
It is selfish in man, in speaking of persons or things, to 
say any thing of them influenced by any selfish feelings. 
It is selfish to call a person selfish, because by so doing 
a want of confidence is implied that the person has not 
done or will not do what he should ; but man can mention 



GOD OF FLATTERY. 


389 


motives of selfishness in individuals from his love, when 
those motives are esteemed as pure, worthy of example, 
or of authority. Man can not from his love say that 
another is a fanatic, because by so doing he presumes to 
a superior condition, and that the person spoken of is in 
an inferior condition. Neither can he say from his love 
that any action is fanatical, because his standard of 
judging must be from his own conceptions of what he 
calls wisdom, which conceptions he can not prove to he 
superior or inferior to that of any other person. 

It is selfish in man to speak of any one as being 
foolish and simple. 

It is selfish to speak of another as a hypocrite or as 
a bigot. 

It is selfish to call the world sinful. 

It is selfish to speak of any one as unrighteous. 

It is selfish to speak of any one as damned. 


ARTICLE XCVII. 

THE GOD OF FLATTERY. 

It is selfish to call any one pure. 

It is selfish to call God, the Holy Ghost, or Christ 
pure. 

It is selfish to call any one good. 

It is selfish in man to imagine others calling him 
good or pure. 

It is selfish in man to speak of women as the superior 
or better portion of the race. 


33* 



390 GOD OF CONVERSATION, ETC. 


ARTICLE X C V III. 

THE GOD OF CONVERSATION. 

Man, in conversation, should not be influenced by 
any of bis selfish feelings. Conversation should be acts 
of love, and not for pastime or personal gratification. 
Man should not seek another because he has something 
amusing to relate, or because he would distinguish him¬ 
self, or because he would let others know that he was 
pure ; neither should he speak in terms of dispraise or 
flattery of others, and thereby imply that he was wise. 

It is selfish in man to talk because etiquette demands 
that something should be said. 

It is selfish in man to speak in terms of praise or 
blame of himself to another. 


ARTICLE XCIX. 

THE GOD OF ANTICIPATION. 

Does man think that his present duties shall change 
to his anticipation of joys ? Has man a few things in his 
care that are irksome ? Does man think that the duties 
that are now grievous shall be changed to those more 
pleasant ? What is troublesome and grievous to man 
is not so to the free. Man must strive to change, that 
he may see joy in all the calls of duty now, and not 
strive to anticipate them coming hereafter. Does man 
anticipate joy in being relieved from the care of a sick 
brother or sister ? Has man parents that are feeble and 



GOD OF ANTICIPATION. 


391 


childish. ? Has he children that give him trouble ? Do 
invalids in his care compel him to drudgery ? Does he 
dislike his neighbors ? Are his houses and lands in bad 
condition ? Is he scorned by one and flattered by another ? 
Man ought not to think the changing of these things 
will make him happy ; for these are the things appointed 
in which he must see joy. If man is scorned by others, 
and he is annoyed, it should tell him of his selfish loves. 
If the possessions of man are in bad condition, he has a 
chance to become strong in becoming faithful over them. 
The more man seeks joy in the present moments of his 
life, the more likely he is to obtain it; and if he is seek- 
ing joy away from his present duties, and expecting it to 
come in the future, he is seeking it through selfish loves. 

Man should not dwell in his imagination on the to¬ 
morrow of his existence ; he should not think that here¬ 
after things that now trouble shall be changed ; he should 
not suppose that when his outward condition suits him, 
that annoyances will not come; or that when he has 
perfected some scheme he shall be happy; or that soon 
he shall have wealth to comfort and friends to cheer him. 

If man is not happy now, he is not more likely to be 
so in the future; for he is in the condition now he 
should be in, and he will always be in the condition in 
which he should, irrespective of his desires. Man, in a sel¬ 
fish condition, is not likely to see joy in the changes of life 
at one time more than another. Man is appointed over 
the duties of the present moment, and should not be 
thinking he should possess things now that he does not; 
for he has now all that he should possess. Is man en¬ 
gaged in labor, and does he think another kind of toil 
more pleasant, or that to-morrow he will be engaged 


392 


GOD OF POLICY. 


in something that will be more satisfactory ? Is man 
discontented now, and does he think that next week or 
next year he shall be happy, because then he will have 
new things ? Over the things in which man is now 
engaged he should be happy ; and if he is not, how 
shall he be happy over other things ? Man should have 
faith that as much love is manifested to-day as there will 
be in the future ; that there are as many friends in the 
present moment of his existence as there will be to-mor¬ 
row ; that he is surrounded to-day with infinite relations 
as much as at any period ; that he is as much appointed 
over the duties of the present moment as he ever will be. 

Man should not strive to live away from the present 
moments of his existence, when the present time is his 
only time of consciousness. Man has a consciousness 
of the power to will in the present moment, and hence 
he can only possess joy in some present moment of his 
life. 

It is not the circumstances about man that require 
changing, it is his love. 


ARTICLE C. 

THE GOD OF POLICY. 

An act of policy is an act of love, when it takes 
place free from selfishness. To the free an act of policy 
is always an act of love. 



GOD OF MISERY, ETC. 


393 


ARTICLE CL 

# THE GOD OF MISERY. 

If misery is better than joy, then to call any one 
action good is to call all the action of infinity good ; and 
to call all the action of infinity good, is the same as to 
call all the action of infinity evil. 

If misery is better than joy, then to call any one 
action a manifestation of love, is to call the infinity of 
action a manifestation of love ; and to call the infinity of 
action a manifestation of love is the same as to call the 
infinity of action a manifestation of selfishness. 

If misery is better than joy, selfishness is better than 
love. 

If misery is better than joy, then to say that any 
one action is right is to say that all action is right; and 
to say that all action is right is the same as saying that 
all action is wrong. 


ARTICLE CII. 

THE GOD OF WISDOM. 

It is wisdom to be free, if joy is better than misery. 
If joy is better than misery, the free only know what 
wisdom is. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom to love the 
world. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom to believe 



394 GOD OF REMINISCENCES. 

that every thing that takes place is a manifestation of 
love. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom to teach the 
world that every thing that takes place is a manifes¬ 
tation of love. 

If joy is better than misery, it is w T isdom in man to 
believe that his own home is wherever he is. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom in man to 
believe that he is dependent on no one. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom in man to 
believe that he is protected in every moment of time. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom in man to 
believe that there are no beings in the universe superior 
or inferior to himself. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom in man to 
see in every one a brother or sister. 

If joy is better than misery, it is wisdom in man to 
seek no joy except that which arises from love. 


ARTICLE CIII. 

THE GOD OF REMINISCENCES. 

It is selfish in man to recall to his mind any humor¬ 
ous or pleasing incident of the past, for his own or others’ 
gratification. 

It is selfish in man to recall to his mind any manifesta¬ 
tion of ill will, uncharitableness, prejudices, or injuries 
of the past to himself or others, for his own or others’ 
gratification. 

It is selfish in man to recall to his mind any indul- 



GOD OF LEGISLATION. 


395 


gence of the passions or appetites in the past, for his own 
or others’ gratification. 

It is selfish in man to recall to his mind any occasions 
spent in pleasure, pastime, or amusements, for his own 
or others’ gratification. 

It is selfish in man to recall any selfishness of the 
past, for his own or others’ gratification. 


ARTICLE CIY. 

THE GOD OF LEGISLATION. 

Any act that prefers one class of beings to another, 
is an act of selfishness. Hence, all laws that give to 
man more privileges than to woman, or that give to 
one race of men more privileges than to another, are 
selfish. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that he shall not or 
can not be protected in future moments of time. Hence, 
all legislation is selfish; because it pre-supposes that 
man is in danger. If by legislation should be meant 
the determination of one or a number of men to escape 
from injuries which are actually impending, it would be 
an act of love. Legislation arises because dangers are 
supposed to be impending. Man can not pre-suppose 
an evil or danger, and be free ; for the act of pre-sup- 
posing it brings fear and selfishness. If man has faith 
in love, his trust is universal; for the infinity of action 
is to him a manifestation of love. If man does any 
thing to impair this faith, he is in a condition of selfish¬ 
ness. It is selfish in man to suppose that it is possible 
for him to be in any danger, or that any thing can take 



396 


GOD OF LEGISLATION. 


place to interrupt his joy or love. When man is men¬ 
aced with injury from his fellows or otherwise, it is self¬ 
ish for him to suppose that what is usually called injury 
can overtake him. But as an act of love, he must seek 
to avoid injuries which would to his conception inter¬ 
fere with his faithfulness. Legislation adopts a stand¬ 
ard of faithfulness which is selfish, for it imposes 
authority; and it supposes that what. one man may 
esteem as faithful all men may esteem as the same, which 
is impossible. It is selfish to pass a law that all men shall 
be free and equal; because it pre-supposes that all men 
might not be free and equal in the future, w T hile man 
has no means of showing but all men are equal and 
free in all times and in all conditions, except he adopt 
some standard of equality and freedom. Any standard 
that man may adopt, he can not prove superior or infe¬ 
rior to any other. Man can not prove that the standard 
of love is superior to any other standard, although he 
can demonstrate that any other standard that can be 
adopted is selfish. 

Man aspires for joy, and he is conscious that all men aspire 
for joy; and the consciousness that all men aspire for 
joy, must determine to him what it is to be faithful. 
Man learns of joy through misery, and of love through 
selfishness; and he also learns that misery and selfish¬ 
ness is a manifestation of love as much as is love and 
joy. Hence, as man can not prove that joy is better 
than misery, or that love is better than selfishness, it is 
selfish in him to prevent another by force from doing 
an act of selfishness which does not interfere with 
another’s method of being faithful over the things in his 
charge, from his love. 


GOI) OF LEGISLATION. 


397 


It is selfish in men to gamble ; and it is also selfish 
to enact that men shall not gamble. Any action except¬ 
ing that of love to free men from selfishness, must be 
an act of selfishness. Men gamble because they aspire 
for joy through a selfish attachment; they must see as 
tyranny any thing that would prevent their gambling 
until they go to a new love ; and it can not be proved but 
their gambling is as much a manifestation of love as is 
their doing any thing else. Hence, it is selfish to enact 
or to prevent men from gambling by force ; because, 
whether they are prevented or not, their selfishness will 
be the same until they obtain a new love. If man is 
prevented from gambling by force, his selfishness leads 
him to some new attachment, which can not be proved 
to be better or worse than gambling. 

It is selfish for man to drink liquors for gratification; 
and it is selfish in any one to sell them for that purpose ; 
it is also selfish to enact or prevent by force, any one 
from drinking or selling liquors. It can not be shown 
that one kind of selfishness is better than another ; and 
the man that will drink or sell liquors, is in the same 
selfish condition, whether he is prevented from doing it 
or not. It is selfish to enact, or to prevent by force, 
any of the acts of selfishness which are not directly 
aggressive on the conception of faithfulness of another. 
Man should try to prevent by force another from taking 
his own life, or the life of others ; because in doing 
this he is acting on the consciousness that every one is 
aspiring for joy. But in preventing man from suicide 
or homicide, the force used should be with reference to 
care over one as well as another. Man, in being faith¬ 
ful as an act of love, must seek to escape from or to pre- 


34 


398 


GOD OF LEGISLATION. 


vent aggressive acts of selfishness ; but if the aggressive 
acts are consummated, he must presume them to be a 
manifestation of love. 

It is selfish in men to contract or bind themselves or 
heirs to do any thing in the future, because it is im¬ 
possible for them to tell whether that act can be an act 
of love. Hence, it is selfish to enact to make compulsa- 
tory the fulfilment of any contracts written or oral. The 
acts of love can have no reference to equivalents in valua¬ 
tion, but to the estimated needs of individuals. If there are 
any circumstances that can make it an act of love to 
refrain from fulfilling a contract, then it would be an act 
of love to refrain from fulfilling all contracts that would 
interfere with the person’s conception of being faithful 
to the one with whom he makes the contract, and to 
those in his care. It is selfish in man to fulfil any con¬ 
tract of the past when it would not be an act of love to 
do so, independent of all agreements or contracts. It 
is not an act of love to do any thing because man has 
agreed or contracted to do it. It would be an act of 
selfishness not to fulfil any agreements, when influenced 
by any selfish motives. The fulfilment of a contract 
can only be made compulsatory as an act of love, except 
the non-fulfilment would be aggressive on the person’s 
conception of faithfulness from his love. But it is 
selfish to suppose that any such compulsion would be 
necessary previous to the existence of circumstances that 
would call it forth, because it implies a want of faith 
that every thing may not be a manifestation of love. 

It is selfish to enact to make compulsatory the payment 
of any specified interest on goods or money. 

It is selfish to enact that there shall be any forfeiture 


GOD OF RETALIATION. 


399 


in instances where men contract to pay more than the 
specified interest. 

It is selfish to enact any laws regulating usury. 

It is selfish to make compulsatory the payment of any 
taxes for the support of any government, organization, 
creed, or sect, in the heavens, spheres, earth, or hell, or 
for the service of God, Christ, the Holy Ghost, the 
ancient dead, the angels, or the devil. 

It is selfish to refrain from paying any taxes when 
influenced by any selfish motives. 

It is selfish to enact or prevent by force any conten¬ 
tions, except those contentions shall be aggressive on 
the person’s conception of faithfulness from his love. 

It is selfish to enact to make compulsatory that man or 
woman shall take care of any person or persons in pref¬ 
erence to others, in consequence of any marriage cere¬ 
mony or contracts. It is selfish to refrain from the care 
of any one when influenced by any selfish motives. 


ARTICLE CV. 

THE GOD OF RETALIATION. 

All retaliation is selfish. 

It is retaliation when the poor find fault with the rich. 
It is retaliation when the rich find fault with the poor. 
It is retaliation when the unfashionable find fault with 
the fashionable. 

It is retaliation when the fashionable find fault with 
the unfashionable. 



400 


GOD OF ENEMIES. 


It is retaliation when uninvited guests find fault. 

It is retaliation when men oppose any kind of govern¬ 
ment because they have not procured office. 

Retaliation is as selfish in governments as in individ¬ 
uals ; and no one kind of retaliation can be proved to be 
more selfish than another. It is as selfish in govern¬ 
ments to inflict penalties or take reprisals, as it is in 
individuals. 


ARTICLE CVI. 

THE GOD OF ENEMIES. 

It is selfish in man to love an enemy less than a 
brother, sister, or friend. 

It is selfish in man to try to love his enemies because 
God or Jesus Christ commanded him to do so. 

All love that does not include enemies is a selfish 
attachment, and can not be proved to be better or worse 
than any selfishness or selfish acts known among men. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to proclaim any 
judgments against his enemies through any'prophets. 

It is selfish in God to inflict any penalties upon any 
nation, tribe, sects, or individuals, for any thing they 
may do. 

It is selfish in any prophet, seer, or person, to pro¬ 
claim any judgments, penalties, or punishments of God, 
Christ, the Holy Ghost, angels, odd force, the ancient 
dead, or the devil, upon any nation, tribe, or individuals. 

It is an act of selfishness to say that any being can be 
an enemy to God. 



GOD OF MOTIVES, ETC. 401 

It is an act of selfishness to say that God ever had 
any enemies. 

It is an act of selfishness to say that Christians are any 
more the followers of God, Christ, or the Holy Ghost, 
than are infidels, atheists, or Mohammedans. 

It is an act of selfishness to teach that God, Christ, 
or the devil, do not love their enemies. 

It is an act of selfishness to teach that there ever will 
be a time when God will not love his enemies. 

It is an act of selfishness to teach that God ever has or 
will inflict any punishment on any enemies for any 
thing that they have done. 

It is an act of selfishness to teach that it is possible 
for enemies to do any unnecessary acts, or any acts that 
are not a manifestation of love. 


ARTICLE CVII. 

THE GOD OF MOTIVES. 

To be free, every motive to action must be one of 
love. 

To be free, every motive to action must be without 
selfish interests or attachments. 


ARTICLE CVIII. 

THE GOD OF TOIL . 

How much of a person’s life ought to be spent in 
endeavoring to become rich ? 


34* 




402 


GOD OF TOIL. 


How much of a person’s life ought to be spent in an 
endeavor to die rich ? 

How much of a person’s life ought to be spent in 
trying to become fashionable ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in order 
to appear well in the first classes of society ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in order 
to appear respectably in church ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in order 
to become famous ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in 
order to become a noted novel writer ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in 
seeking office? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in 
thinking of the opposite sex with reference to marriage ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in the 
indulgence of passions and appetites ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in 
pleasures, pastimes, and amusements ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in 
seeking personal gratification ? 

How much of a person’s life should be spent in 
securing a future heaven ? 

How much time ought men to spend in telling the 
world that they or some one else is purer and better 
than others ? 

What ought the world to toil for ? Ought those' who 
live in hovels toil that they may live in palaces ? 

Ought the poor toil, that they may be rich ? Ought 
the rich toil, that they may be richer ? 

Ought the rich toil, that the poor may remain in pov- 


GOD OF TOIL. 


403 


erty ? Ought the poor toil, that the rich may become poor? 

Ought man to toil for a good reputation and for honor ? 
Ought the disreputable endeavor to injure the reputable ? 
Ought the reputable endeavor to injure the reputable 
or the disreputable ? 

How much time ought man to spend in telling the 
world how wicked and foolish some people are ? 

How much time ought man to spend in telling the 
world that he is pure and can be relied on ? 

How much time ought man to spend in telling the 
world to beware of false prophets and deceivers ? 

How much time ought man to spend in telling the 
pure to beware of impurity ? 

How much time ought man to spend in telling how 
much better the world is now than it was ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling people 
to become religious ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling the 
world that if men conform to nature they will be free 
from the ills of life ? 

How much time ought to be spent in discovering the 
laws that govern the universe ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling what 
God thought ? — what he can and can not do ? 

How much time ought to be spent in endeavoring to 
discover how many Gods there are ? 

How much time ought man to spend in attending 
celebrations and anniversaries ? 

How long ought man to weep over the loss of 
property, reputation, or of friends ? 

How many ought to spend their time in inviting 
sinners to repentance ? 


404 


GOD OF TOIL. 


How much time ought to be spent in telling people 
to join a church ? 

How much time ought to be spent in endeavoring to 
convince the world that the dead can talk with the 
living ? 

How much time ought to be spent in distributing the 
Bible as the word of God ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling that 
two-thirds of the world will be damned ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling that all 
in the world shall be saved ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling that 
man is immortal ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling that 
Christ is the Son of God ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling the 
world that God sent Jesus Christ to save men from hell 
or sin ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling men 
that they should be born again ? 

How much time ought to be spent in telling men 
that they should pray to God ? 

How much time ought to be spent in writing poetry 
or music ? 

How much time ought to be spent in chanting hymns 
and praises to God ? 

How much time ought to be spent at picnics, excur¬ 
sions, associations, and conventions ? 

How much time ought to be spent at fashionable 
places of resort ? 

Ought a man to toil that he may live in the city ? 

Plow much time ought to be spent in retaliation ? 


GOD OF THE PAST. 


405 


How much time ought to be spent in punishing 
criminals ? 

How much time ought to be spent for the glory of 
God? 

One kind of toil can not be proved to be superior to 
another; but all toil that does not arise from love, is 
selfish. 


ARTICLE CIX. 

THE GOD OF THE PAST. 

If man will seek to be free, his present moments of 
life are for him to endeavor to love, and to do the acts 
of love ; and the selfishness of the past must be in faith¬ 
ful remembrance, until he can see it to be a manifesta¬ 
tion of love. At every new standard to which man 
arrives in freeing himself from his selfish attachments, 
he should endeavor to bring up his past life to be tried ; 
and all that appears to him selfish in the past, he should 
not grieve over as unnecessary, but should establish in 
his mind as selfish, and thus prevent like motives from 
influencing him again. While man should look on 
every action of the past, whether selfish or not, to be a 
manifestation of love, he should see in those selfish acts 
the misery from which he aspires to escape. Man can 
not be free until he brings to his mind every possible 
act of the past, to see if it be of love or of selfishness, 
and establish all motives of selfishness as such in his 
mind ; or else the same motives of selfishness must con¬ 
tinue to influence him in the future. It is the expe- 



406 


GOD OF PLEASURE, ETC. 


rience of the past that tells man what to do in each pres¬ 
ent moment of life ; and consequently, until the selfish¬ 
ness of the past is established in his mind as such, he 
has no means by which he can go to a new joy and love. 
Man must review his past life until he is free. 

He must establish every selfish motive or influence of 
the past in his mind, that he may be free from its influ¬ 
ence in the future. 

He must look upon every selfish act of the past- as a 
necessary act. 

He must look upon every selfish act of the past, as 
well as all other acts, as a manifestation of love. 

He must see all the acts of others, that he has called 
evil or injurious to himself, as a manifestation of love. 

He must see all acts of the past which he esteemed 
evil or injurious to others, as a manifestation of love. 


ARTICLE CX. 

THE GOD OF PLEASURE AND OF PAIN. 

Man’s condition is relative, and wdiat he calls pain 
and pleasure is different in every individual. Any con¬ 
dition that continues becomes common. Man may feel 
pleasure from music, but if he were always to hear it, it 
would be common. Man, in one condition, may seek 
what he would call ecstatic bliss, but if the ecstatic bliss 
should continue it becomes his common condition, free 
from pleasure and free from pain. It is selfish in man 
to seek any condition by which he shall prefer moments 



GOD OF PLEASURE, ETC. 407 

in time ; for every such condition is a selfish attach¬ 
ment, and if obtainable must soon cease. 

A physical condition that one may know as common, 
may give to another pain or pleasure for a time; but 
any condition of physical pain or pleasure, should it 
continue for eternity, must become common, and be a con¬ 
dition free from pleasure and pain. The physical condi¬ 
tion of man that he calls free from pleasure and pain is 
to him a standard, by which he knows of pain and 
pleasure. But this standard is different and also rela¬ 
tive in every individual. Man does not know that he 
has the same standard in any. two moments of time. 
Man changes this standard through the changes of life 
in experiencing new pleasures or new pains. But all 
seeking of new physical conditions of delight, were man 
always successful in obtaining them, must be the seeking 
of pain, or he would have no conception of them. If 
man seeks and obtains a new physical delight, that 
delight becomes common, and in becoming common it 
becomes misery. Hence, man has no means of showing 
that any condition that he calls a physical pleasure 
exists to him, except through his selfish attachments. 
To be free, man must not prefer moments in time, and 
must seek to make all conditions as common. Although 
that standard that a man may call common may change 
in every moment of time, it is nevertheless the standard 
over which he must feel appointed, in being faithful in 
the condition in which he finds himself. But man is 
not faithful over that standard which he knows in 
successive moments of time, when he seeks physical 
pleasure ; for, in seeking pleasure, he selfishly loves 
and dreads ; he loves the pleasure sought, and seeks to 


leave or dreads the standard, which to him is common. 
In seeking pleasure, man seeks pain. If man ex¬ 
periences conditions of pleasure or pain, he should 
seek to make those conditions common, by not prefer¬ 
ring moments in time for them. 


ARTICLE CXI. 

THE GOD OF THE FAITHFUL. 

Every one should do things after their best concep¬ 
tions of duty ; and one is no more appointed to do any 
thing than another. Man is appointed to do every 
thing he does; for in reality one event of life is not 
more important than another. The constant desire of 
all men is joy, and this joy will come to all when they 
are faithful. In striving to be faithful, man changes. 
No one ought to complain of outward needs, of the 
few things in his charge, but seek to be faithful over 
what he has. 

Will persons say that some things in their care are 
unworthy ? Man should be faithful over things deemed 
unworthy; and whatever things are in his care, are the 
things to perfect his life. Man should always seek for 
joy, while caring for the things in his charge now. If 
any one will not seek to be faithful, not deal justly, 
will slight the work in his care, leave things to take 
care of themselves because they are not the things of 
his choice, he can not receive any new joy. 

Men can be faithful over work for which they are 


GOD OF JOY. 


409 


not sufficiently rewarded, and in those instances where 
employers request work to be slighted. No one ought 
to be afraid of being driven into the street if he is faith¬ 
ful. No being is dependent on another. Man does 
not know the future, or the things that the infinity of 
action will bring to him. If any one is making a gar¬ 
ment for another, he is set apart for that work. Man, 
in toiling over things that belong to himself or others, 
to the one who loves or hates, — and whether he will 
receive half or double wages, — whether any one will 
know he has done the work or not, — should be equally 
faithful. If any have parents, or the children of another 
in their care ; if strangers call at their door in need ; 
if a child strays to their roof; if they go into the fields 
to labor for themselves or others ; if they are selling 
merchandise ; if they are cheated in deal, — they should 
strive to be faithful, or they can not find freedom. No 
one ought to say that there are placed about him cir¬ 
cumstances, so that he can not be faithful. One should 
seek to be faithful in the condition he is now placed. 


ARTICLE CXII. 

THE GOD OF JOY. 

As man is conscious of aspiring for joy, he is con¬ 
scious that all aspire for joy ; and from his love he must 
endeavor to tell the world how joy can be found. Man 
can not invite others to love, when he has no faith in 
love. But when he has faith in love, he will toil for 

35 



410 


GOD OF OBLIGATIONS. 


the world, that all may find the joy for which they are 
aspiring. If man finds a brother who seeks for joy and 
finds misery, he should try to tell that brother how joy 
can be found. If man tells the world that joy can be 
found by any other method than by love and the acts 
of love, he must give selfish motives. If man has faith 
in love, to be faithful he must endeavor to do the acts 
of love; he must endeavor to give to all the joy for 
which he is conscious they are aspiring. Man can not 
be free unless his endeavor is, in all conscious moments 
of time, to love and to do acts of love. 

It is selfish to anticipate any joy. 

All joy that does not arise from love in the present 
moment of existence, is selfish. 


ARTICLE CXIII. 

THE GOD OF OBLIGATIONS. 

Any act that presumes to an obligation in return is 
selfish, because it is labor for a reward. The acts of 
love can place no one under any obligations ; hence, all 
obligations are selfish. The acts of love can not be done 
with reference to any new joy, and man does not owe 
any thing to another in consequence of an act of love ; 
if he did his joy would be dependent, because there is 
an uncertainty about his paying. Man is in a selfish 
condition when he supposes that he is under any obliga¬ 
tions to any one, or that any one is under any obligations 
to him for any act or contract that has taken place or 




GOD OF VALUATION. 


411 


been made in the past. It is selfish in man to give or 
lend to another for the purpose of placing that person 
under any obligations. It is selfish in man to seek to 
borrow or to receive gifts for the purpose of placing 
himself under any obligations to another. Man may 
place all his funds in the hands of another in trust, and 
if he feels any dependence on that person in consequence, 
it is selfishness ; and if the borrower feels under any 
obligations to the lender to restore any portion of them, 
or if he has any anxiety whether he will be able to do so 
or not, it is selfishness. Man can borrow from another 
as an act of love, and restore back as an act of love ; 
but it is selfish to suppose that the borrowing places man 
under obligations to a return. It is an act of selfishness 
in man not to return what he has borrowed, when 
influenced by any selfish motives. Man is under no 
obligations to do acts of love, but he must act in all 
moments of time from the strongest motives. All the 
acts of men are imperative; and hence, man can not do 
the acts of love because under any obligation, but 
because they are his joy. 


ARTICLE CXIV. 

THE GOD OF VALUATION. 

Man can not prove that worlds are of any more value 
than an atom of matter, except through his selfish feel¬ 
ings. Increased quantities and numbers can not be 
proved to be of more value than diminished quantities 



412 


GOD OF CURRENCY. 


and numbers. Man can not show that he can effect 
more for himself or others with a thousand dollars 
than with one. It is selfish in man to become attached 
to one article more than another on account of a sup¬ 
posed higher value, or from any considerations of time 
or expense in producing. The acts of love can have 
no reference to valuation, but to the needs of man. It 
is selfish in man to become attached to money, lands, 
houses, or to any articles that are called property, more 
than to the air or to the water of the sea. In being 
faithful man seeks the uses of those things he needs, and 
seeks to give them to others. 


ARTICLE CXV. 

THE GOD„OF CURRENCY. 

It is selfish in governments to establish any currency. 

It is selfish in governments to fix any value upon one 
metal or article more than upon another. 

It is selfish in governments to establish that the giving 
or receiving of any coins are legalized equivalents more 
than the giving or receivipg of any thing else. 

It is selfish in governments to charter banks or com¬ 
panies with reference to increasing the circulation of one 
article more than another, or with reference to establish¬ 
ing current equivalents. 



GOD OF BARGAINS. 


413 


ARTICLE CX Y I. 

THE GOD OF BARGAINS. 

It is selfish to say or to believe that competition or 
opposition is necessary to business. To suppose that 
competition is necessary, is to suppose that it is allowable 
for the seller of an article to take all that he can compel 
the purchaser to give. The same compulsion exists in 
competition, by which the purchaser is enabled to obtain 
the article less. There is no difference between the sel¬ 
fishness of the seller and buyer when the one compels 
the other to pay a large profit, and when the one compels 
the other to sell at a reduced profit. It is selfish in 
communities to be gratified with an active competition, 
by which the prices of articles or the fare by public 
conveyances are cheapened. It is equally as selfish in 
a community to determine that the prices of articles shall 
be cheapened by combining together, and thus use a 
greater amount of capital to secure a better bargain. 
The only difference is, they wish to compete with whole¬ 
sale instead of retail prices. Every inducement which 
a purchaser presents to the seller why he should take 
less for an article, is selfish ; and every inducement that 
the seller presents to the purchaser why he should pay 
more, is selfish, when these inducements are presented 
from considerations of gain by either the buyer or seller. 
It is an act of selfishness in man to seek to make a good 
bargain, if by a good bargain is meant the selling or 
buying of an article for more or less than the estimated 
value. It is an act of selfishness ever to appeal to the 
selfish feelings in order to induce any one to pay more 


35 * 


414 


GOD OF INSTRUCTION. 


or to take less for an article. Man, in selling or buying, 
should regard the welfare of the seller or purchaser as 
he should his own. 


ARTICLE CXVII. 

THE GOD OF INSTRUCTION. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to undertake to tell 
or convince any person of a fact or truth that would 
interfere with the person’s selfish attachments, except 
that person shall make a demand. In all instances of 
giving instruction, the demand must come from the 
pupil, or it is contention. A person may believe that 
it is necessary to worship three Gods ; it is an act of 
selfishness to tell that person that his worship is selfish, 
unless that person shall intimate a demand. 

If man asserts that any information is false or true, 
without any proof, it is selfish to undertake to convince 
him that his assertion is erroneous. 

If man gives information to another and he is dis¬ 
puted, it is selfish in him to re-assert what he said. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to give his reasons 
or conclusions with any enthusiasm or excitement. 

It is selfish in man to seek to instruct any one who is 
under any excitement. 

It is selfish to tell any one that joy is better than 
misery, or that misery is better than joy. 

It is selfish to tell a man how any thing can be 
found for which he does not aspire. 


GOD OF THEORY, ETC. 


415 


It is selfish to tell a man how he can be free if he 
does not aspire for freedom. 

It is selfish to tell a man that joy comes from love if 
he has no faith in love as giving joy. 

If a man believes the Bible to be an inspired book, it 
is selfish to tell him that it is uninspired, unless he 
shall intimate a demand. 

There is no means of proving that one belief is better 
than another; and hence, man can not undertake to 
convince another without a demand, unless he has him¬ 
self a selfish attachment. The reason why one belief 
can not be shown to be better than another, is because 
joy can not be shown to be better than misery. 

If man aspires for joy, it is an act of love to tell him 
how joy can be found. 

If man aspires for joy through any selfish attach¬ 
ment, it is selfish to tell him how joy can be found, 
unless he shall intimate a demand. 

If man aspires for misery, it is selfish to tell him how 
joy can be found. 


ARTICLE CXVIII. 

THE GOD OF THEORY AND SPECULATION. 

When by theory or speculation is meant any hypo¬ 
thesis by which' in the minds of some any existing 
state of things is satisfactorily accounted for, it is selfish 
in man to theorise or speculate, or to give his contem¬ 
plations to the world. Every hypothesis thus made is 
only one of an infinity of chances ; and no more proba- 



416 


GOD OF TRADES, ETC. 


ble than any one of an infinity of methods by which 
any effect can be produced. 

When b^theory or speculation is meant inferences 
from facts, which inferences are not equal to the facts 
themselves, it is selfish to indulge in any such infer¬ 
ences, or to give them to the world. Any inference 
thus made from a fact which is not equal to the fact 
itself, is only one of an infinite number of chances; 
and any one of the infinite number of chances are 
equally as probable. Man may find a bone in a layer 
of the earth, and the bone existing in the layer of the 
earth is a fact; but it is selfish in man to undertake to 
account for the fact, because there are an infinity of 
chances against him ; and he can have no motive for his 
undertaking except that of selfishness. Again, he may 
draw inferences from the layers of earth that cover this 
bone ; he may know the time that one or two layers have 
been produced, and from this calculate the time of the 
existence of the earth ; and every inference thus drawn 
is an act of selfishness, because there are an infinity of 
chances equal to every conclusion, and all of which are 
equally probable. 


ARTICLE CXIX. 

THE GOD OF TRADES AND PROFESSIONS. 

It is selfish to seek any one trade or profession in pre¬ 
ference to another, for the purpose of ease, fame, riches, 
or position in society. 

It is selfish in any counsellor to refrain from advising 



GOD OF TRADES, ETC. 417 

individuals or communities, — whenever a demand is 
intimated, — in a manner which to his conception would 
be a good. 

It is selfish in any physician to refrain from advising 
individuals or communities, when to his conception he 
can do so as an act of love to prevent disease and to pro¬ 
mote health. 

It is selfish in a counsellor at law to pledge himself 
to protect the interests of his clients ; and every act he 
does with reference to this pledge, is an act of selfish¬ 
ness. 

It is selfish in medical or law schools to establish any 
rules to be observed by their pupils in the practice of 
their professions ; and every act that takes place with 
reference to these rules, is an act of selfishness. 

It is selfish in any school to give any diplomas, certif¬ 
icates of qualification, or titles. 

It is selfish in any school to make necessary any course 
of study, in order to obtain a certificate of qualification 
or title ; and e very act with reference to obtaining this 
end, is an act of selfishness. 

The judiciary regulations by which one man is allowed 
to plead in court in preference to another, on account of 
qualifications, are selfish. 

It is selfish in any medical, law, or theological schools, 
to establish any standard by which they declare that an 
individual has completed his studies; and every exam¬ 
ination with reference to this standard, is an act of 
selfishness. 

It is an act of selfishness in any medical, laV, or theo¬ 
logical school, to prefer any one class in community to 
that of another for pupils. 


418 


GOD OF OLD AND YOUNG. 


It is selfish to enact that preachers or judges can per 
form the ceremony of marriage in preference to any 
others. 


ARTICLE CXX. 

GOD OF THE OLD AND YOUNG. 

It is selfish in any one to suppose that he must enjoy 
himself while young. 

It is selfish in any one to suppose, because young, 
he should seek pleasure, or should be negligent of 
any of the duties of life. 

It is selfish in persons to seek to be married, to live 
away from the old and feeble who may be in their care. 

It is selfish in the old to relinquish any of the duties 
of life because death is near. 

It is selfish in the old to feel dependent on the young 
who care for them. 

It is selfish in the young to feel dependent on the old 
who care for them. 

It is selfish in the old to seek to make their heirs rich, 
or to die rich, or to have fears that those in their care 
will not be cared for after they are dead. 

It is selfish in any one to have fears that his property 
will be squandered after his death. 



GOD OF LEGACIES, ETC. 


419 


ARTICLE CXXI. 

THE GOD OF LEGACIES. 

It is selfish in governments to enact how the property 
of intestate persons shall be disposed of. 

It is selfish in governments to enact that property shall 
or shall not be disposed of agreeably to the will of 
testate persons. 

It is selfish to enact that property shall in any instance 
revert into the hands of governments or into the hands 
of any religious or social institution. 

It is selfish in any one to will property that his name 
may come before the world. 

It is selfish in any one to seek to become a legatee to 
any one’s property. 

It is selfish in any one to contest the will of deceased 
persons. 

Man can not execute a will from his love except he 
loves the world. Man can not execute a will from his 
love if he has any attachment for property. 


ARTICLE CXXII. 

THE PRACTICAL GOD. 

Man has no means of showing that one person is more 
practical than another. Man decides any thing to be 
impracticable that conflicts w r ith his selfish attachments. 
What a man loves is to him a standard from which to 
decide any thing to be true or false, practicable or imprac- 



420 


DOUBTING GOD. 


ticable. A man who spends all his energies in becom¬ 
ing rich or famous, will look upon all others as imprac¬ 
ticable whose inclinations lead them in other directions. 
To say that any one person is impracticable is the same 
as saying that all are impracticable ; and to say that all 
are impracticable is the same as saying that all are 
practicable. 


ARTICLE CXXIII. 

THE DOUBTING GOD. 

Man must have faith in love to be free; but he 
is never free until his faith is equal to the conscious 
fact of existence. If man has a doubt that every thing 
that takes place is not a manifestation of love, he can 
not love or do the acts of love. If man doubts that 
every thing that takes place is a manifestation of love, 
any ipore than he doubts the fact of existence, he can 
not be free. If man speaks in any way, to imply a 
doubt that every thing is not a manifestation of love, he 
is not free. If man does any thing, doubting that 
every thing is not a manifestation of love, he is not free. 
If man has a doubt that anything has taken place in the 
past that was not a manifestation of love, he is not free. 
If man has a doubt that any thing can take place in the 
future that would not be a manifestation of love, he is 
not free. If man has not faith that every thing as it 
now is, and every act, emotion, or thought that ever 
has or will exist, is not a manifestation of love, he can 
not love or do the acts of love. Man’s faith in love 
must be equal to the consciousness of existence. 



FEEBLE GOD, ETC. 


421 


ARTICLE CXXIY. 

THE FEEBLE GOD. 

Man is feeble when he is selfish. If man indulges 
in one selfish act, emotion, or thought, he loses the 
strength and power of the free. If man indulges in 
one selfish act, emotion, or thought, he is invited to 
indulge in another selfish act, emotion, and thought. 
When man commits an act of selfishness, he is in a 
selfish condition, and his selfishness is without strength; 
for he is conscious that his joy can be interrupted. If 
man would grow in strength, and be free, he must 
never be guilty of a selfish act, emotion, or thought. 
If he permits one selfish act, he is open to receive all 
kinds of selfish influences. 


ARTICLE CXXY. 

THE GOD OF KNOWLEDGE. 

Man, in being faithful, must love the world, seeking 
for all as he seeks for himself. But in loving, he can 
not prefer one to another, or a nation to an individual. 
If individuals, families, tribes, nations, or worlds, are in 
the care of man, he should be faithful, not preferring 
worlds to individuals, families, tribes, or nations. Man 
can love all beings, but his acts of love must be in 
definite localities, and in given points of time. Hence, 
most of the acts of love are confined to the associations 
of man, and more particularly to the objects of his care. 
But every act is one of the infinity of causes and effects ; 

26 



422 GOD OF SELF-DENIAL, ETC. 

its results are infinite, and eternity can only comprise 
it. Man is unfaithful, if he does any thing that is not 
an act of love. All his acts are not acts of love when 
he is influenced by any selfishness. Man must seek 
knowledge in order to be faithful in doing the acts of 
love. It is, however, selfish in man to seek for any 
knowledge that has not a reference to the persons of 
his care or association. It is selfish in man to seek for 
any knowledge for accomplishment, gratification, or 
fame. It is selfish in man to study that he may dis¬ 
cipline his mind, because that discipline of mind has 
reference to accomplishment or personal gratification. 
It is an act of selfishness to study any language, or 
branch of mathematics, or science, without the design 
of making the information applicable as acts of love. 
To seek knowledge for the sake or pleasure of know¬ 
ing, is selfish. As long as man is in a selfish con¬ 
dition, he is more likely to seek that knowledge which 
the world praises as such, or which coincides with his 
selfish feelings. But in loving and doing the acts of 
love, all knowledge he may seek must have a reference 
to the acts of love. The free must seek knowledge, 
that they may be faithful in doing the acts of love. 


ARTICLE CXXVI. 

THE GOD OF SELF-DENIAL, PATIENCE, AND SELF- 
SACRIFICE. 

To practice self-denial is an act of selfishness, because 
in doing it one is obliged to suppose that he denies to 
himself some joy or benefit. Man can not relinquish 



GOD OF SELF-DEN A L, 


ETC. 


423 


any selfish attachment but by faith that it prevents a 
new joy ; hence, man in leaving his selfishness must 
have faith that he is going from misery to joy, and not, 
as in the case of self-denial, that he is relinquishing any 
j oy. In practising self-denial man covets that which he 
relinquishes ; and hence, the motive for practising it is 
always mercenary and selfish. Man practises self-denial 
because of public opinion, pride, influence, example, 
and deplored effects. In practising self-denial that man 
may obtain that which he calls a good, is selfish ; 
because what he calls a good is a preferred effect, for 
which he has a selfish attachment in all instances of self- 
denial. There is no means of proving that the effect is 
any better when man practises self-denial than when he 
does not. 

The practice of patience is always an act of selfish¬ 
ness. Impatience implies that something unnecessary 
has taken place, or that something should take place that 
has not. 

The practice of self-sacrifice is an act of selfishness, 
because in doing it one presumes that he has conferred 
or placed some one under obligations, or that he has 
relinquished something, or that he should have some¬ 
thing that he does not now possess. Man should not 
suppose that he can give up any joy, or that he does not 
now possess all the joy he should. 

In the practice of self-denial, patience, and self-sacri¬ 
fice, an estimated good may be the result, and the oppo¬ 
site an estimated evil, yet in practising them man is in 
a selfish condition. Man is as selfish in coveting indul¬ 
gence as in seeking it. He is as selfish in restraining 
his anger for fear of consequences as in not restraining 


424 


GOD OF CHARITY. 


it. He is as selfish in giving to the needy any coveted 
goods as in withholding them. Society usually praises 
the act in one instance and condemns the other; but 
man has no means of proving that the result of any one 
act is superior to that of another. 


ARTICLE CXXVII. 

THE GOD OF CHARITY. 

Man, in giving from his love, does not relinquish a 
claim or right, or deny to himself a good for the ben¬ 
efit of another, as is usually implied by charity. 

If by charity is meant that one person is under any 
obligation to another for what has been given, it is self¬ 
ish to bestow charity, and selfish to receive it. Man, 
who gives from his love, does not give because he 
feels under any obligations to do so, or because he 
wishes to claim any more attention from the one who 
received the gift. Man, in giving to another, should 
feel the same towards the person as if he had not given ; 
and the one who has received from another, should feel 
the same towards the person as if he had not received. 
Man may receive, as an act of love, what is given to 
him as an act of selfishness ; and man may give, as an 
of love, what may be selfishly received. 



GOD OF PROFANITY, ETC. 


425 


ARTICLE CXXYIII. 

THE GOD OF PROFANITY. 

It is no more selfish in man to use one unnecessary 
word than it is to use another. He who seeks to em¬ 
bellish his compositions or speech with choice sentences 
to suit the ear, is as selfish as the one who uselessly 
repeats the name of God and Christ. It is as selfish to 
use one expletive word as another. It is selfish in man 
to speak because he has a choice word that he can use. 
A person in using the words, “ Mercy !” “ Dear me ! ” 
“ Ah ! indeed ! ” as expletives, is as selfish as the one 
who calls on God and Christ to love and to damn 
others. As an act of love, man should convey his ideas 
in a manner the most direct, and the most easily to be 
understood. 


ARTICLE CXXIX. 

THE GOD OF FREE DISCUSSION. 

It is selfish in man to teach any thing that he 
believes to be selfish; and it is selfish in him to invite 
others to teach what he believes to be selfish. It is 
selfish in man tq. invite free discussion in any public 
meeting or public journal; because, in so doing, he 
must invite others to teach what he believes to be self¬ 
ish. An editor of a journal may point out motives of 
selfishness in any society, as an act of love ; but if any 
one, feeling agrieved, shall wish to enter into a discus- 

36 * 


426 


INVESTIGATING GOD. 


sion in the journal of the editor, the editor is under no 
obligations to do so ; and. it would be selfish in the 
editor to permit any thing to appear in his columns, 
from any source, or under any circumstances, which he 
believes is selfish to teach. It is implied by public 
journals or meetings, that they are to give instruction; 
and it is as selfish in those who have control of them, 
to lend their influence to any thing that they believe to 
be selfish, as it is to do any other selfish act. Hence, 
to invite free discussion in any public meeting or 
journal, is selfish. 


ARTICLE CXXX. 

THE INVESTIGATING GOD. 

It is selfish to teach that man should investigate any 
one class of phenomena more than another. Man is 
not selfish in refusing to investigate any thing which is 
not a fact equal to the consciousness of existence, unless 
influenced by selfish considerations. Man may investi¬ 
gate any subject as an act of love, but it is selfish to 
presume that he is under any obligations to do so. 
Man may not be selfish in refusing to investigate 
whether the events recorded in history are true; or 
whether there is a God ; or whether Christ is the Son 
of God ; or whether the Bible is inspired ; or whether 
the dead can talk with the living. Are those who 
refuse to investigate whether the dead can talk with the 
living any more selfish than those who assert that “ they 
dare not,”—that they are afraid ? ” Is it more selfish 



ABUSED GOD, ETC. 427 

in man to refuse to inquire about spirits than to refuse 
to inquire about the flight of birds ? A society of men 
may teach that the world will be burned, — man may 
refuse to investigate it from his love. Should man run 
after the selfish attachments of every individual that 
comes to him ? Man may investigate any class of 
phenomena as an act of love, but it is selfish to presume 
that he should investigate any thing that is not a fact 
equal to the consciousness of existence. 


ARTICLE CXXXI. 

THE ABUSED GOD. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that it is possible for 
him to be abused or injured by God, angels, men, or 
devils. Every moment spent in grieving over fancied 
or real injuries, or of telling them to others, is an act of 
selfishness. 


ARTICLE CXXXII. 

THE GOD OF IMMORTALITY. 

Man has no means of proving an eternity of con¬ 
scious existence. That man is conscious of existence 
after death does not prove an eternity of conscious 
existence any more than to be conscious of existence 
after sleep. Man may converse with a being who 




428 GOD OF NON-RESISTANCE. 

* 

died six thousand years ago, but he has no more 
proof of an eternity of conscious existence than he has 
in finding a being that knows but one conscious moment. 
A million of years of conscious existence does not 
prove any more than one year of conscious existence. 
Man has no means of proving that after death he shall 
consciously live. He may be able to establish that 
Christ, or every human being that ever died was con¬ 
scious of life after death, it is no proof that any one that 
now lives shall be conscious of life after death. Man 
may say that it is probable ; but a million of probabili¬ 
ties can not establish a fact. Man has no means of 
proving that he shall live from one moment of time to 
another in this world ; neither has he any method of 
proving that he shall have another moment of conscious 
existence in this or in the future world, or in any place 
in the universe. 


ARTICLE CXXXIII. 

THE GOD OF NON-RESISTANCE. 

It is selfish in man to submit to any thing, for by 
submission he practices self-denial. To be free man 
must love the oppressor as he loves his friend ; he must 
love the oppressor when he enslaves as when he liberates. 
Man must do for his oppressor as he would do for his 
friend. Man should never submit to any forced labor 
for fear of any consequences to himself or any one else; 
but he may labor under an oppressor as an act of love, 
believing under the circumstances of his condition it is 
the best he can do. But man must resist his brother 



GOD OF MOTHERS, ETC. 


429 


the same as he would resist the wind, the fire, or the 
falling tree. This resistance must not be punishment 
or retaliation, but in order to be faithful over all things. 
The oppressed is no more the guardian of his own life 
than he is the guardian of the life of his oppressor. 


ARTICLE C X X XIV. 

THE GOD OF MOTHERS. 

It is selfish to presume that the natural mother of a 
child is any more its guardian than any one else. To 
presume that the mother is better suited to the care and 
education of a child than its father, is also selfish. If 
joy is better than misery, the possession of all the king¬ 
doms of the world for a million of years is not of so 
much importance as one moment’s endeavor spent by a 
father or mother in learning a child how to love. 


ARTICLE CXXXV. 

THE GOD OF ENDLESS PUNISHMENT. 

To prove endless punishment to be true, man must 
prove the certainty of an eternity of conscious existence ; 
also prove that there can exist through eternity a being 
of sufficient hatred, willing to produce, or consign to 
unmitigated pain; also prove that there can exist 
through eternity a being capable of producing or con- 



430 


TRUE AND FALSE GOD. 


signing to unmitigated pain; and also prove that any 
condition that comprises an eternity of existence is not 
capable of pleasure as well as pain, all of which it is 
impossible for man to prove. Hence, to believe in end¬ 
less punishment is selfish ; and every apology for it is 
an act of selfishness. 


ARTICLE CXXXVI. 

THE TRUE AND FALSE GOD. 

Man can not prove any thing to be true or false ; 
and the reason is, he can not prove that he does or does 
not exist. 

After man has assumed his own existence to be a fact, 
he can not prove any thing to be true or false, which is 
not equal to the fact of his existence. Man can not 
prove that there is a God, neither can he prove 
there is no God ; but he can demonstrate that it is an 
act of selfishness to believe in God or to worship him. 
Man can not prove that endless punishment is false. 
He may say that it is improbable and inconsistent; but a 
million of inconsistencies to the perception of a finite 
being amount to nothing; but he can demonstrate that to 
believe in endless punishment is selfish, and that every 
effort to teach it is an act of selfishness. Man can not 
prove that Christ did or did not die to appease the wrath 
of God ; but he can demonstrate that it is an act of 
selfishness to believe and to teach it The truth or fal¬ 
sity of the existence of a God can not be equal to the 
fact of existence ; hence, man has no means of proving 



POPULAR GOD, ETC. 


431 


that God does or does not exist. The truth or falsity 
of the inspiration of Paul can not be equal to the con¬ 
scious fact of existence ; hence, man has no means of 
proving that Paul was or was not inspired ; although he 
can demonstrate that it is selfish to believe and to teach 
that he was an inspired teacher. 


ARTICLE C X XXV 11. 

THE POPULAR GOD. 

To seek popularity by any means whatever, is selfish. 


ARTICLE CXXXYIII. 

THE GOD OF PROPHECY. 

Increased quantities and numbers can not be proved 
to be more important than diminished quantities and 
numbers ; neither can diminished quantities and num¬ 
bers be proved to be more important than increased 
quantities and numbers. Hence, for one man to pro¬ 
phesy of future events, during the existence of the world, 
is not more important than if every man prophesied of 
every event during the existence of the world. Neither 
is it more important to tell of an event that is to take 
place than to tell of an event that has taken place. There¬ 
fore, every prophecy that is made with reference to veri¬ 
fying the sincerity or truth of any action or opinion, or 
with reference to establishing any authority for any books, 
sayings, or persons, or with reference to establishing any 
superior or inferior condition, is an act of selfishness. 



432 


GOD OF CHANCE. 


It was selfish in God to prophesy to Abraham that his 
descendants should be a numerous and a favorite people. 

Every prophecy that God made to the Israelites, that 
he would give to them the land of Canaan, was an act 
of selfishness ; because it led the Israelites to believe that 
they were superior to the Canaanites. 

Every prophecy that was made of the destruction of 
* cities, for the purpose of making the people do better, 
was an act of selfishness. 

Every prophecy that was made of Christ, with refer¬ 
ence to establishing the truth of any thing he might say* 
was an act of selfishness. 

Every reference that Christ made to prophecies, in 
order to give any authority to his person or to what he 
said, was an act of selfishness. 

Every prophecy that Christ made with reference to 
giving any authority to his person or to his sayings, 
was an act of selfishness. 

Every prophecy that is made by God, angels, odd 
force, the ancient dead, or the devil, in order to estab¬ 
lish that the dead can talk with the living, or to give 
authority to any book or person, is an act of selfishness. 


ARTICLE CXXXIX. 

THE GOD OF CHANCE. 

Man cannot show that any one action takes place by 
chance more than another; for to say that one action 
takes place by chance, is the same as saying that all 
action takes place by chance, which is the same as say¬ 
ing that no action takes place by chance. 



GOD OF FATE, ETC. 


433 


ARTICLE CXL. 

THE GOD OF FATE. 

Man cannot prove that any one act is an act of fate 
or of necessity more than another; for every action is 
connected with the infinity of causes and effects. 


ARTICLE CXLI. 

THE GOD OF DESIGN. 

To say that any one thing shows design, is the same 
as saying that every thing shows design ; for any one 
thing can not be proved to show more design than 
another ; and to say that every thing shows design is the 
same as saying that nothing shows design. 


ARTICLE CXLII. 

THE GOD OF THE FIRST CAUSE. 

The existence of every thing in the universe is equal 
to the non-existence of every thing in the universe. Man 
can not prove that any thing does or does not exist ; but 
in consequence of his consciousness he is obliged to 
assume his own existence to be a fact, and, consequently, 
the existence of every thing. Man, in order to show 
that every thing has a first cause or a beginning from 
one or a number of sources, must prove the fact of the 
existence of every thing ; also, he must be capable of 
proving that any one thing is more a cause to any thing 

97 







434 


GOD OF REFORMERS. 


that takes place than another ; also, he must be capable 
of showing that the first cause lies in the past instead of 
in the future or in the present moment; also, he must 
be capable of showing that the first cause commences in 
one moment of time more than another ; also, he must 
be capable of tracing some effect that comes to his notice 
back to a first cause or causes ; all of which are impossible. 


ARTICLE CXLIII. 

THE GOD OF REFORMERS. 

A reformer must have an attachment for the truth he 
teaches; hence, it is selfish to be a reformer ; and it is 
selfish to seek to be the follower of a reformer; because 
in thus seeking, one must be led by authority. 

It is selfish to seek to obey the commands of God. 

It is selfish to seek to obey the importunings of the 
Holy Ghost. 

, It is selfish to seek to be a Christian. 

It is selfish to seek to be a follower of St. Augustine. 
It is selfish to seek to be a follower of Arius. 

It is selfish to seek to be a follower of Arminius. 

It is selfish to seek to be a follower of John Calvin. 
It is selfish to seek to be a follower of John Wesley. 
It is selfish to seek to be a follower of John Murrey. 
It is selfish to seek to be a follower of Emanuel 
Swedenborg. 

It is selfish to seek to be a reformer. 

It is selfish to seek to be a follower of any reformer 
that ever lived in the heavens or on the earth. 



GOD OF CHRISTIANITY. 


435 


ARTICLE CXLIY. 

THE GOD OF CHRISTIANITY. 

It fs selfish to seek to be a Christian or a follower of 
Christ; because in thus seeking, one must be led by 
authority. 

It was selfish in Matthew,' Mark, Luke, and John, to 
write the life of Christ. 

It is selfish to teach that Christ performed ar.y won¬ 
ders or miracles. 

It is selfish to teach that any one should be a follower 
of the God that Christ revealed. 

It is selfish in any one to write a commentary on the Old 
or New Testament, believing them to be inspired books. 

It is selfish in any one to preach from any text in the 
Old or New Testament, believing that text to be inspired 
truth. 

It is selfish in man to undertake to explain any 
inspired truth. 

It is selfish to endeavor to circulate the Bible, or to give 
it to any one to read, believing it to be an inspired book. 

It is selfish to teach that eternal life can be found by 
searching the Scriptures. 

It is an act of selfishness to read in the Bible, suppos¬ 
ing it to contain more truth than any other book. 

It is an act of selfishness to inform any one that 
Christ was a superior being. 

It is an act of selfishness to inform any one that Christ 
or Paul were divine teachers. 

It is an act of selfishness to inform any one that there 
is any thing sacred about the Holy Ghost. 


i 


436 


GOD OF THE CREATION. 


ARTICLE CXLY. 

THE GOD OF THE CREATION. 

It was selfish in God to create the heavens and th^earth; 
because in creating them he could have had no motive. 
If God had any motive for creating the heavens and the 
earth, he must be finite, because in acting from motives, 
he must be acted on by influences outside of himself. 
If God created the heavens and the earth without any 
motives, it was an act of selfishness; because any act 
that is not an act of love, must be an act of selfishness. 

It was selfish in God to see that any thing was good 
after he created it; for to say that any thing was good, 
implies the possibility of evil to an infinite author; and 
to say that evil can be to an infinite author, is to say 
that an infinite author, can be finite. 

It was selfish in God to have rested on the seventh 
day, because he must have done so without any motive. 
If God had a motive for resting, he was finite ; because 
to have any motive for doing any thing, he must be 
acted on by influences outside of himself. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to create man 
inferior to himself; because in so doing, he preferred 
himself to man. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to create woman 
inferior to himself; because in so doing, he preferred 
himself to woman. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to say that man 
should rule over woman ; because in so doing, he made 
woman inferior to man. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to forbid Adam to 


GOD OF THE FLOOD. 


437 


eat of the tree of good and evil, for he could not have been 
conscious of existence until he knew of good and evil. 

It was selfish in God to have any fears that Adam 
would live forever by eating of the tree of life. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to deceive man ; 
because instead of death, man became conscious of life 
through good and evil. 

It was an act of selfishnesss in God to put enmity 
between the serpent and woman. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to curse the ser¬ 
pent above all living animals. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to cause woman to 
bring forth children in sorrow because of the transgression. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to cause the ground 
to be cursed for the sake of man, and to promise that he 
should eat in sorrow all the days of his life because of 
the transgression. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to place cherubims 
to keep Adam and Eve from the tree of life. 

It was an act of selfishness in the cherubims to do the 
behest of God, in guarding the tree of life. 

It was an act of selfishness in God to suppose that 
Adam, Eve, and the serpent, were moral agents. 


ARTICLE CXLYI. 

THE GOD OF THE FLOOD. 

It was selfish in God to premeditate the destruction 
of men, because of their wickedness. 

It was selfish in God to prefer the lives of Noah and 
his relatives to others. 

37 * 



438 GOD OF THE BIBLE PROPHETS. 


It was selfish in God to destroy the world by a flood. 
It is selfish to teach that God destroyed the world by 
a flood. 


ARTICLE CXLVII. 

THE GOD OF THE BIBLE PROPHETS. 

It is selfish in any one to prophesy of any judgments 
or calamities to individuals or nations. It is selfish to 
prophesy of judgments, because man does not know that 
he is punished for one thing more than another, in con¬ 
sequence of any action of infinity. Judgments and cal¬ 
amities, known as such to individuals or nations, lead 
men to prefer moments in time, which is selfish. 

It was selfish in the Lord to say, through Isaiah, that 
the children which he had brought up had rebelled 
against him, or that he would ease him of his 
adversaries, and avenge him of his enemies. 

It was selfish in the Lord to reveal himself to Jeremiah, 
and to proclaim his wrath against the Jews. 

It was selfish in Jeremiah to lament about the condition 
of Jerusalem. 

It was selfish in the Lord to reveal himself to Ezekiel, 
to prophesy judgments on account of wickedness. * 

It was selfish in Daniel to say that the Lord had caused 
the writing on the wall before Belshazzar, because he 
used the wine cups of the Lord’s house. 

It was an act of selfishness in Hosea to take a wife of 
whoredoms and children of whoredoms, because the 
Lord told him to do so. 

It was selfish in Joel to proclaim any of the judgments 
of God. 



GOD OF THE BIBLE PROPHETS. 439 

It was selfish in Amos to proclaim any of the judgments 
of God. 

It was selfish in Obadiah to proclaim any of the 
judgments of God. 

It was selfish in God to endeavor to send Jonah to 
Nivevah against his wishes. 

It was selfish in Micah to exhort the people to mourn. 

It was selfish in Nahum to prophesy of God’s 
judgments upon Ninevah. 

It was selfish in Habakkuk to prophesy of judgments 
upon the Chaldeans. 

It was selfish in Zephaniah to prophesy of God’s 
judgments upon Judah. 

It was selfish in God to manifest, through Haggai, a 
desire to have the work of the temple prosper. 

It was selfish in Zechariali to prophesy rewards and 
punishments. 

It was selfish in Malachi to say that any had wearied 
the Lord with words. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to prophesy of the 
judgments of God. 

It was selfish of St. John to prophesy of the judg¬ 
ments of God. 

Every prophecy made respecting the coming of Jesus 
Christ, was an act of selfishness ; because the prophe¬ 
sying of Christ implied that he was a superior being ; 
and, also, the prophesying of Christ implied that he 
was to be accepted on the authority of prophecy. 

It is selfish to believe in God, Christ, or the devil, 
because prophecies were made of them ; and hence, it 
is selfish to make any prophecies respecting them, with 
reference to having any one believe in them. 


440 god of Christ’s disciples. 


ARTICLE CXLVIII. 

THE GOD OF THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST. 

It was selfish in Christ to teach that he was authority 
for truth. 

It was selfish in the disciples of Christ to accept him 
as authority for truth. 

It was selfish in Paul, while going to Damascus, to 
ask Christ what he would have him to do. 

It was selfish in Peter to baptize any one in the name 
of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins. 

It was selfish in Peter to do any miracles in the name 
of Jesus Christ. 

It was selfish in Paul to preach that Christ was the 
Son of God. 

It was selfish in Paul to say that he was a servant of 
Jesus Christ. 

It was selfish in Peter to say that, wives should be 
in subjection to their husbands. 

It was selfish in Peter to call the wife a weaker 
vessel. 

It was selfish in John to say that “God is love ; ” 
because it is the same as saying that God is selfish; 
because it is impossible to prove that God is love; and 
because it is praising God to call him a being of love. 


ARTICLE CXLIX. 

THE GOD OF THE FOLLOWERS OF GREAT MEN. 

It is selfish in man to seek to be the follower of 

another. 



GOD OF LOYE. 


441 


It is an act of selfishness to prophesy that any 
superior man will ever appear on earth. 

It is an act of selfishness to prophesy that any remark¬ 
able book shall be given to the world. 

It is an act of selfishness to prophesy that any one 
man shall give more truth to the world than another. 

It is selfish to seek to be a follower of God, Christ, 
the Holy Ghost, angels, odd force, great men, the 
ancient dead, or of any being in the universe. 


ARTICLE CL. 

THE GOD OF LOVE. 

If man strives to love God, he can not love any one ; 
because the selfish endeavor to love a superior being 
will prevent his loving. 

If may prays to God, he can not love any one ; 
because the selfish acknowledgement of a superior 
being will prevent his loving. 

If man asks the forgiveness of God, he can not love 
any one ; because the selfish acknowledgment of an 
unnecessary act will prevent his loving. 

If man seeks to go to heaven, he can not love any 
one ; because the selfish desire of condition will prevent 
his loving. 

If man seeks for any future joy, he can not love any 
one; because the anticipated selfish gratification will 
prevent his loving. 

If man believes in any superior or inferior beings, he 
can not love any one ; because the manifestation of 
selfish preferences will prevent his loving. 



442 


CONVERTED GOD, ETC. 


ARTICLE CLI. 

THE CONVERTED GOD. 

It is selfish to try to convert men to God, Christ, 
the devil, Mohammed, Confucius, the dead, or to any 
creed or men in the universe. 


ARTICLE C LI I. 

THE GOD OF REWARDS. 

When by reward is meant a renumeration for labor 
which is preferred by man in order to be faithful over 
beings in his care from his love, it is not selfish to seek 

it. 

But it is selfish in man to seek for any reward for 
personal gratification ; or to expect any joy from it more 
than what is possessed in the present moment. An act 
of love can not take place for a reward which has refer¬ 
ence to any personal gratification, or any better condi¬ 
tion, or more joy than is now possessed. All promise 
of rewards for doing good are acts of selfishness; be¬ 
cause in making the promise there is an appeal to self¬ 
ish attachments. Man will do those acts that the world 
calls good, if by them he may secure a house for which 
he may have a selfish attachment. But in seeking the 
house for which he has a selfish attachment by doing 
good acts, he is as selfish as in seeking any thing else. 
Hence, it is selfish to offer any reward for doing good, 
or to say there is any reward for being pure, or being 
free from selfishness. It is selfish to pay any one for 



GOD OF REWARDS. 


443 


being faithful; because in so doing it is implied that 
some one is under an obligation in consequence of faith¬ 
fulness, and that the person in being faithful is in need 
of something to complete his joy. If man is faithful 
from any other motive than that of love, it is selfish ; 
consequently, he cannot be faithful because he shall 
receive some future condition or joy without being selfish, 
because he has all the joy which love can give the 
moment he has faith in it. Hence, to offer man any 
reward for being good, or to say that any reward is for 
the good and pure, excepting the joy that arises from 
love in the present moments of existence, is selfish. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of 
heaven.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, 
for they shall be filled.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say: “ Blessed 
are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children 
of God.” 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say : “ Blessed 
arc they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, 
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” 


444 


GOD OF REWARDS. 


It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell men to 
rejoice ; that they were blessed ; or that their reward 
was great in heaven, if they were persecuted for his sake. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell men to let 
their light shine, so that others might glorify God. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say who should 
be called least and greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 

It was an act of selfishness in Qhrist to say that any 
one should be in danger of hell-fire. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell men if 
any one took away their coats, they should give to them 
their cloaks. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell men to 
love their enemies, that they might be the children of 
their Father who was in heaven. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell men to 
give their alms in secret, that God might reward them 
openly. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell men to 
pray in secret, that God might reward them openly. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell any one to 
fast in secret, that God might reward them openly. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell the 
people to lay up treasure in heaven, where thieves 
could not break through or steal. 

It was an act of selfishness in Qhrist to tell the 
people to judge not, that they might not be judged. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to tell a young 
man to give all he had to the poor, that he might have 
treasure in heaven; and to bid the young man to 
follow him. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say that his 


GOD OF REWARDS. 


445 


followers should inherit a kingdom prepared for them 
from the foundation of the world. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say that those 
who did not follow him should depart into everlasting 
fire, prepared for them by the devil and his angels. 

Is was an act of selfishness in Christ to say that those 
who denied him before men should be denied before 
the angels of God. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say that those 
who confessed him before men he would confess before 
the angels of God. 

It was selfish in Paul to intimate that persons should 
run with patience the race set before them, because they 
were compassed about with a cloud of witnesses. 

It is selfish in Christians to teach that any one 
should be faithful, because Christ died or endured any 
afflictions for them. 

It is selfish in any one to teach that persons should 
be faithful, because God and the angels are watching 
over them. 

It is selfish in any one to be faithful, because a 
departed mother, father, brother, sister, wife, husband, 
child, or friend, is watching over them. 

It is selfish in man to do any thing, because God, 
angels, the dead, or Christ, promise to him any joy. 

It is selfish in man to do anything, because it has 
been prophesied that he shall be a great teacher, shall 
give much truth to the world, or that his name shall go 
to posterity. 

38 


446 


GOD OF JESUS CHRIST. 


ARTICLE CLIII. 

THE GOD OF JESUS CHRIST. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to say that he 
was the Son of God. Eor any one to say that he is the 
Son of God, or has seen, spoken, or had a direct com¬ 
munication from God, is to imply that whatever he does 
are superior acts, and whatever he says are truths. 
Hence, for any person to teach that he is the Son of God, 
he must teach and ask others to believe from authority, 
and not from their own conceptions. It was no less an 
act of selfishness in Jesus Christ to teach by authority, 
by saying he was the Soinof' God, than it was in Moham¬ 
med or any other individual who has ever claimed any 
superior power or gifts from God to teach from author¬ 
ity. Every act of teaching of Jesus Christ, in which he 
expressed or implied that he was the “ Son of God,” the 
“ Light of the world,” the “ Savior of the world,” or that 
he was a superior being to any one that ever lived, was 
an act of selfishness; because in thus teaching he taught 
by authority. 

It was an act of selfishness in Jesus Christ to teach 
or imply from the miracles which he performed, that he 
came from God ; because it was teaching from authority. 

It was an act of selfishness in Jesus Christ to inti¬ 
mate that in dying for enemies it was a greater act of 
love than it was to die for friends. If man loves a 
friend, he knows no difference between the love of friends 
and enemies. 

If God decided that Christ should die in order to 
manifest his love for the world, he decided on an act of 


GOD OF JESUS CHRIST. 


447 


selfishness; for in so doing, he must seek to give his 
love to the world by authority. It is selfish in God to 
prefer that the world should know his love in preference 
to the love of any other being. Hence, for God to send 
his Son to die, that the world might know of his love, 
he must have had a selfish attachment for the result, 
that the world should know of that love in preference 
to any other. If God had Christ die in order to mani¬ 
fest his love for the world, that love was a selfish 
attachment. If any being decides to die in any moment 
of time, or if any one decides a being shall die in any 
moment of time, the motives that lead to such a decision 
must be mercenary and selfish. 

Man in being faithful in the condition in which he 
finds himself, must seek to preserve his life and to 
preserve the life of others. From the infinity of causes 
and effects, it was impossible for Christ to prove that 
his death would do any more good than his living ; 
consequently, it was an act of unfaithfulness in God to 
decide that Christ should die, and an act of unfaithful¬ 
ness in Christ to die because God wished him to. 
Hence, the love that was manifested to the world 
through the death of Christ by God, was a selfish 
feeling, and must have had reference to some selfish 
attachment to results. It was selfish in God to prefer 
to have the world believe that he was God in preference 
to any one else, or that Jesus Christ was his Son in 
preference to any other person ; and it was selfish in 
Jesus Christ to prefer that the world should believe that 
he was the Son of God in preference to any other 
person. 

It was selfish in God to prefer that the world should 


448 GOD OF INDEPENDENT ACTION. 

be saved through his only Son in preference to any 
other person. It is selfish in the world to prefer to be 
saved through Jesus Christ in preference to Judas 
Iscariot* Mohammed, or any other person. 

It was selfish in God to prefer that Jesus Christ 
should die for the world in preference to any other per¬ 
son. It is selfish in the world to accept the death of 
Jesus Christ in preference to the death of any other 
person, as doing more good or evil. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to do any thing in order 
to verify that he was the person of whom prophecies 
had been made. It is selfish to suppose that Jesus 
Christ did any more good or evil because any prophe¬ 
cies were made of him. 

Every act of teaching or doing miracles by Jesus 
. Christ, as the Son of God, the Savior of the -world, or as 
a superior being, was an act of selfishness. Every act 
of teaching that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world, 
the Son of God, or a superior being, is an act of selfish¬ 
ness. 


ARTICLE CL IV. 

THE GOD OF INDEPENDENT ACTION. 

Man can have no conception of an independent 
actor, because he can not conceive of any action but 
what it is connected with causes and effects in given 
points of time and in definite localities. Man can not 
show that any one action is more independent or free 
from causes and effects than another. Man acts from 
motives or causes that arise to his mind in given points 
of time and in definite localities. An independent 



GOD OF FAITH. 


449 


actor must act without any previous or posterior cause 
for acting, which to the conception of man makes all 
action impossible. An independent actor must act, also, 
without being connected with the causes and effects that 
come to the consciousness of any being, which to the 
conception of man is impossible. An independent 
actor must also act by sight, and not by faith, which to 
the conception of man is impossible. A being, to act 
by sight, must not act in any given time or locality ; 
must not act from one motive more than another; and 
must know all motives to action the same as one or 
an infinity of motives; must not act because any thing 
is believed to be a good or evil; and must not act from 
any causes or effects known in any given time or locality. 
If a being acts in order to produce a good, it is an act 
of faith ; if a being acts in order to bring to himself joy, 
it is an act of faith ; if a being acts from motives that 
arise to his mind in any given time or locality, it is an 
act of faith. Hence, to the conception of man it is 
impossible for him to introduce into the infinity of 
action an independent actor ; and it is impossible for 
him to show that any one thing or being is more or less 
connected with the infinity of causes or effects than 
another. 


ARTICLE CLY. 

THE GOD OF FAITH. 

It is selfish to teach that one faith is superior to 
another. 

It is selfish to teach that any faith shall produce any 
joy or misery in the future. 

38 * 



450 


GOD OF FAITH. 


It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say that those who 
believed in him should be saved, and those who believed 
not should be damned. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say to his disciples 
that if they had faith they could remove mountains. 

It is selfish to teach that there is any reward or 
punishment for one thing more than another. It is as 
selfish to teach any reward for a particular kind of 
faith as to promise a reward for any good or evil act 
that ever took place. It is as selfish to try to love God 
or Christ in order to obtain any reward, as it is selfish in 
parasites to flatter the rich in order that they may 
receive gifts. It is as selfish to teach that faith in God 
and Christ will bring a future joy or heaven as it is to 
teach that smoking, drinking, and gambling, will make a 
gentleman. To teach that there is a reward for any one 
faith or belief, is an endeavor to impose authority. A 
person that is selfishly attached to any future condition, 
finds it no more difficult to say that he believes certain 
things in order to obtain it than he does in doing a cer¬ 
tain thing in order to obtain any thing he wishes. If 
man believes his God has revealed to him a heaven to 
be gained and a hell to be avoided for eternity, he is 
willing to conform to any of those conditions by which 
his heaven can be gained which God may impose. If 
God tells him to believe in him and his Son Jesus 
Christ, he is ready to do so in order to gain the 
reward. If God tells him to join the church, he is 
ready to do so in order to obtain the reward. But in 
seeking this reward he is as selfish as in seeking any 
gratification or pleasure among men. It was as selfish in 
God and Christ to reveal a future heaven to be gained, 


* * 


SELF-EXISTENT GOD. # 451 

and hell to be avoided, as it is in the votaries of indul¬ 
gence to promise pleasure to the uninitiated. 


ARTICLE CLYI. 

THE SELF-EXISTENT GOD. 

In saying that a being can exist uncaused, is the 
same as saying that a being exists, the cause of which 
existence man is unacquainted with. 

All beings are self-existent as long as they are con¬ 
scious of their own existence ; but man never had a 
conception of any thing uncaused, for nothing exists to 
man, of which he is conscious of no cause or effect 
relating to it. When man has a conception of an effect, 
he has a conception of a cause, and that cause as also . 
an effect; and causes and effects exist to his mind in 
given points of time and in definite localities. Ail 
uncaused being must have existed in all periods of time ; 
having existed in the unfathomable future, past, and 
the present moment; and no more existing now than 
in the past and future; and no more existing in the 
past than in the future, or in the future than in the 
past ; because, if there has or can be a time that an 
uncaused being has not lived, that being can be proved 
to be an effect from the infinity of causes and effects ; 
and to say that a being has lived in all periods of time, 
past and future, is the same as saying that the same 
being never has or can live. 

If an uncaused being does exist, there is no cause for 
his existing. 



452 


GOD OF INTUITION. 


To say a being exists uncaused, is the same as saying 
that a being does not exist. 

To say that a being exists uncaused, is the same as 
saying a being has no connection with the infinity of 
causes and effects, which is impossible. 

To say that every thing that now exists, was caused 
by an uncaused being, is the same as saying that nothing 
ever has or can exist. 

To say that an uncaused being acts, is the same as 
saying there is no action. 


ARTICLE CLV11. 

THE GOD OF INTUITION. 

When by intuition is meant that man can discern 
truth without the use of reason or argument, it can not 
be shown that one possesses the faculty any more than 
another. When any thing is presented to man, he has 
an impression respecting it, and his impression is usually 
in accordance with some standard previously adopted. 
If this impression is given immediately to the world, 
and it is called truth, it is also often called intuitive 
truth. 

When by intuition is meant that man discovers truth, 
because he is more in harmony with the laws of God 
and nature, one man cannot be shown to possess the 
faculty any more than another ; because no one being 
can be shown to be more in harmony with the laws of 
God and nature than another. 

If by intuition is meant that the individual receives 
his truth directly from God, it is selfish in God to give, 



COMMUNICATING WITH* THE DEAD. 453 

and in the individual to receive ; because it is giving 
and receiving on authority. 

It was an act of selfishness in Jesus Christ to say that 
God was manifested through him, or that he came to 
do the will of God, or to intimate that he knew more of 
God than any one else, or to censure persons because 
they did not believe in him as the Son of God. 


ARTICLE CLVIII. 

THE GOD OF COMMUNICATING WITH THE DEAD. 

It is selfish to teach that Jesus Christ rose from the 
dead. 

It is selfish to teach that Christ talked with his 
disciples after death. 

It is selfish to teach that any one can see or talk with 
the dead. 

That man can see and talk with the dead is not equal 
to the conscious fact of existence, for of it man needs to 
be informed. Hence, it is impossible to prove that the 
fact that the dead can talk with the living, is of any more 
importance than any other fact of which man can 
receive information. Man can not assume that any one 
fact is more important than another, of which he is 
under the necessity of being informed, except through 
his selfish feelings. 

To teach that the dead can talk with the living, is to 
assume that it is a fact necessary to the joy of man ; 
while it must produce a selfish and dependent joy, for 
there is an uncertainty whether man is informed of it. 

Any reason why man may assume it to be of import- 



454 GOD OF THE CARES OF LIFE, ETC. 

ance to know whether the dead can talk with the living, 
must arise from the selfish feelings. It is selfish in 
man to be anxious whether he or his friends shall con¬ 
sciously exist in the next moment of time or in the 
future world. Man can not prove that he is in a super¬ 
ior condition in a conscious than in an unconscious 
state. 


ARTICLE CLIX. 

THE GOD OF THE CARES OF LIFE. 

It is selfish in man to seek release from the cares of 
life by recreation, pastime, or amusements. It is selfish 
in man to have any care, if by it he means anxiety or 
trouble. It is selfish in man to seek to forget any con¬ 
dition in which he may be placed, or any of his concep¬ 
tions of duty. Man can not be weary or in anxiety 
about any thing if he is free ; for then, everything is a 
manifestation of love. 


ARTICLE CLX. 

THE GOD OF MISFORTUNE. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that any misfortune 
or adversity can overtake him in life. 




INDIFFERENT GOD, 


ETC. 


455 


ARTICLE CLXI. 

THE INDIFFERENT GOD’. 

It is selfish in man to feel indifferent about any thing. 
To be free, man must have a care of every thing over 
which he is conscious of exerting any control. 


ARTICLE CLXII. 

THE SAD GOD. 

It is selfish in any one to relate their misfortunes in 
order to invite sympathy, pity, or wonder. 

It is selfish to assume any appearance of sadness. 


ARTICLE CLXI 11. 

THE PECULIAR GOD. 

It is selfish in man to endeavor to attach any pecu¬ 
liarity to his person in the way of manner, action, or 
ideas, different from others. 

It is selfish in any author or writer to endeavor to 
form a peculiar style of composition, by which he may 
become known or distinguished from others. 

It is selfish in any public speaker to endeavor to form 
a style of address by which he may become distin¬ 
guished from others. 




456 


GOD OF JUBILEES, ETC. 


ARTICLE CLXIV. 

THE GOD OF JUBILEES. 

How long and how often ought men to fire cannon, 
give cheers, illuminate the cities when any thing takes 
place that pleases them ? 

Every public demonstration of joy is selfish. 

It is an act of selfishness to hail the appearance of 
any man, or the utterance of any sentiment or toast with 
cheers, clapping of hands, or by any demonstrations of 
favor or disapprobation. 

It is an act of selfishness to illuminate churches in 
commemoration of the birth of Jesus Christ. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to celebrate the 
anniversary of any event that may be called important. 


ARTICLE CLXY, 

THE PATRIOTIC GOD. 

It is selfish to seek to be or to be called a patriot. 


ARTICLE CLXYI. 

THE MILITARY GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to seek to fight for 
his country. 

It is selfish in man to seek to belong to any military 
organization. 




COURAGEOUS GOD, ETC. 


457 


It is selfish in any military officer to seek for pro¬ 
motion. 

It is selfish in any one to seek for any of the titles 
that are given to military men. 


ARTICLE CLXVII. 

THE COURAGEOUS GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to do any thing 
that the world may call him courageous or brave. 

It is selfish in man to expose his life that he may be 
called brave. 

It is selfish in military officers to perform any <( splen¬ 
did achievement ” that they may be promoted, or to 
invite praise, honor, or renown. 


ARTICLE CLXVIII. 

THE GOD OF MEMENTOS. 

It is selfish to seek to wear any ornaments. 

It is an act of selfishness to make presents of ornaments 
to others. 

It is an act of selfishness to make presents of ornaments 
to others, in order to be held in remembrance. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to obtain any mementos 
of the dead or living. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to obtain the like¬ 
ness of any person, living or dead, superior or inferior, 
in order to hold them in remembrance. 

89 




458 GOD OF FRIENDS, ETC. 

It is an act of selfishness to make any presents for 
personal gratification. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to obtain the autographs 
of great men. 

It is an act of selfishness to circulate an album, to have 
it filled with the writings of friends. 

It is selfish to attach any more value to any article, 
because it was a gift from a friend, brother, father, 
mother, sister, or child, living or dead. 


ARTICLE CLXIX. 

THE GOD OF FRIENDS. 

It is selfish in man to love a friend more than any 
one else. 

It is selfish in man to love his father, mother, brother, 
sister, or child, more than any one else. 

It is selfish in man to esteem the name of his father, 
mother, sister, or child, as any more sacred than that of 
any other person. 

It was an act of selfishness in Jesus Christ to teach 
that his friends should obtain greater rewards than his 
enemies. 


ARTICLE CLXX. • 

THE RECOMMENDED GOD. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that he is under obli¬ 
gation to a person because he comes recomjnended by 
God, angels, odd force, the dead, the devil, his father, 
mother, brother, sister, or friend. 




RECOMMENDED GOD. 


459 


It is selfish in God, angels, odd force, the dead, the 
devil, man, or woman, to recommend a person to a friend, 
for the purpose of placing that friend under obligations 
which he would not otherwise have felt. 

It is selfish in any one to seek to be recommended by 
God, angels, the dead, or the living, for the purpose of 
placing any one under any obligations. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to do any thing 
because God, angels, or his neighbors, have done it. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to do any thing 
because God, angels, his father, mother, or neighbors, 
living or dead, wish him to do it. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to refrain from doing 
any thing because God, Christ, the dead, the devil, or the 
Pope wished him to do it, if it would be an act of love. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to buy any book 
because it is recommended as “ thrilling ; ” as a “ reve¬ 
lation of astounding facts; ” as the “ greatest book 
that was ever written ; ” as a book containing more 
truth than any other book in the world. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to buy any book 
because it was written by a famous author; or published 
by noted publishers ; or criticised by the most famous 
critics ; or recommended in the standard works of 
literature ; or because great men have given their 
opinion that it ought to be read by every one. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to recommend any 
books or persons by saying that he had a vision respecting 
them. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to recommend any 
book because he or his friends have any pecuniary 
interest in its circulation. 


460 


RECOMMENDED GOD. 


It is an act of selfishness in any person to notice any 
publication in a public journal because it was received 
as a present, or from any other consideration, except as 
an act of love. 

It is an act of selfislmess to recommend any publica¬ 
tion to any class of people because it will meet or inter¬ 
fere with their personal prejudices. 

It is an act of selfishness to recommend the sale of 
any publications by telling the number of thousand 
copies that have been sold. 

It is an act of selfishness to recommend any book or 
public journal by saying that it contains more news, 
reading matter, or is better conducted than others. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to refrain from 
recommending any publication when he can do so from 
motives of love. 

It was selfish in the angel of the Lord to say to the 
shepherds in Judea, “ For unto you is born this day in 
the city of David, a Savior, which is Christ the Lord.” 

It was selfish in the heavenly host to praise God and 
say, “ Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, 
good will towards men.” 

It was selfish in John the Baptist to say that Jesus 
Christ was preferred before him ; or to say that Christ 
was the Son of God; or to say to the people of him, 
that he was the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin 
of the world. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say that he was the 
light of the world. 

It was selfish in Peter to say that Jesus Christ was 
approved of God by miracles, wonders, and signs. 


GOD OF SICKNESS. 


461 


ARTICLE CLXXI. 

THE GOD OF SICKNESS. 

It is selfish in the sick to use any means to obtain 
health that would not be an act of love. 

It is selfish in the sick to prefer one person to 
another to care for them, when no cause for that prefer¬ 
ence exists, except through selfish attachments. 

It is selfish in any one to seek release from the care 
of the sick on account of preferring other kinds of labor. 

It is an act of selfishness to give any narcotics to the 
sick, aged, infirm, or children, that they may be less 
troublesome. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek release from the 
care of idiots, or the insane, on account of the opinion of 
the world. 

It is an act of selfishness in any one to do less for the 
sick because they are irritable or ungrateful. 

It is selfish in any one caring for the sick to suppose 
that he could do any thing of more importance ; or ever 
to intimate how profitably his time might otherwise be 
employed ; or to say that he was compelled to drudgery. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that any one he has 
cared for when sick is under any obligations to him in 
consequence. 

It is selfish in those who have been sick to suppose 
that they are under any obligations to those who have 
cared for them. 

It is selfish in the sick, and in those who care for 
them, to neglect any means that would be an act of love 
to produce health. 

39 * 


46 £ PLEASURES OF APPETITE, ETC. 


ARTICLE CLXXII. 

THE GOD OF THE PLEASURES OF APPETITE. 

The indulgence of every appetite is an act of selfish¬ 
ness, when one moment in time is preferred to another 
for pleasure or pastime. It is selfish in man to partake 
of food, if he has pleasure in so doing more than in 
other moments of time. Every appetite that is a grati¬ 
fication of body or mind, which man seeks for or prefers 
on account of any agreeable sensation, is selfish. The 
pleasure of appetite sought under any circumstances, is 
selfish. All festivals, public dinners, and pic-nics, are 
selfish. 

It is selfish to cultivate a refined taste for food. 

It is selfish to teach children the pleasures of appe¬ 
tite, by telling what is good to eat; by giving them 
sweet-meats and pies; by telling them which class of 
food should be eat first ; by promising them something 
better to eat, if they will be good; by repeating before 
others their preferences for particular classes of food. 


ARTICLE CLXXIII. 

THE GOD OF THE PASSIONS. 

Every exercise of the passions is an act of selfishness. 
To eagerly desire or long for any thing is selfish. 

It is selfish in man to be excited about any thing. 
Every feeling of enthusiasm is selfish. 

Every feeling of religious enthusiasm is selfish. 



IMPRESSED GOD. 


463 


It is selfish in man to feel that it is better to be in 
the house of the Lord than in that of the devil. 

It is selfish to long to be with Christ. 

It is selfish to long to be in the presence of God. 

It is selfish to long to be with the angels. 

It is selfish to long to walk the streets of the New 
Jerusalem. 

It is selfish to long for a change of seasons. 

All attachments to one sex in preference to the 
other, is selfish. 

All attachments to any festivities, — seasons of 
amusements of any description, are selfish. 

All attachments to localities are selfish. 


ARTICLE CLXXIV. 

THE IMPRESSED GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness in any one to say that he is 
“ under impression,” or is impressed,” intimating a 
higher authority than himself, or that what he says is 
more certain and reliable. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to intimate that the 
Holy Ghost, or the Holy Spirit, was a superior 
influence. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to exhort his disciples 
when they were delivered up, to take no thought how 
or what they should say, for it should be given to them 
what they should speak. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to tell his followers 



464 


GOD OF THE DEAD. 


that the Comforter should direct them to all truth, or 
to intimate that the Comforter was a superior influence. 

It was selfish in the disciples of Christ to speak as 
the Spirit gave them utterance, on the day of Pentecost. 

It was selfish in Philip to join himself to a chariot 
because the Spirit directed him. 

It was selfish in Peter to do any thing because the 
Spirit directed him. 

It was selfish in Peter to tell others that he had been 
directed by the Spirit, meaning by it a superior influence. 

It is selfish in any medium to do any thing because 
spirits direct them to do it, or to do any thing by 
“ impression,” when is meant by that “ impression ” a 
superior influence. 

. It is selfish in any person to speak as the Spirit gives 
them utterance. 


ARTICLE CLXXV. 

THE GOD OF THE DEAD. 

It is selfish to seek to perform any ceremonies over 
the dead. 

It is selfish to eulogize the dead. 

It is selfish to seek to ornament the graves of the dead. 
It is selfish to mourn for the dead. 

It is selfish in man to endeavor to make any one mourn 
or weep for the dead. 



GOD OF ANECDOTES, ETC. 


465 


ARTICLE CLXXYI. 

THE GOD OF ANECDOTES. 

It is an act of selfishness in any one to tell anecdotes 
or incidents for personal gratification. 

It is an act of selfishness in any one to seek to hear or 
read anecdotes or incidents for personal gratification. 


ARTICLE CLXXVII. 

THE GUILTY GOD. 

By guilt is usually meant that man knowingly violates 
his conceptions of duty. Man can not be said to be 
guilty of acts of selfishness, except when he knowingly 
commits a selfish act. Those who believe that revenge 
is a good, are not guilty when they retaliate on their 
enemies, although this retaliation is an act of selfishness. 
Christ might have believed that he was conferring a 
good by saying that the poor in heart are blessed, for 
they shall see God. Hence, in saying it he would not 
violate any conception of duty, or be guilty of any thing. 
Nevertheless, it was an act of selfishness in him to pro¬ 
mise or intimate that there was any reward for the pure. 
Christ may not have been guilty of violating his highest 
conceptions, when he taught the people to judge not 
that they might not be judged ; yet it was an act of 
selfishness to present the reason why they should not 
judge, that they might not *be judged in return. It is 
selfish in any one not to judge because he is afraid of 



466 


GOD OF DUTY. 


being judged. It is an act of selfishness to judge, and 
it is an act of selfishness to be influenced by selfish 
motives to refrain from judging. It is not selfish to be 
meek, or to inherit the earth; but it is selfish to be meek 
in order to be blessed, or to inherit the earth. It is 
impossible for a man to be pure in order to see God; 
for the reward he seeks must prevent his purity. Man 
is no better if he refrains from judging that he may not 
be judged ; it is only a change of the selfish feelings. 
It is impossible for man to be meek that he may be 
blessed, or that he may inherit the earth ; for the act of 
selfishness in seeking the blessing will prevent his meek j 
ness. No one should judge another, and say that he 
was guilty of acts of selfishness. Man commits an act 
of selfishness in trying to love his neighbor, in order to go 
to a future heaven ; but he may not be guilty of an act of 
selfishness, because he may not violate any of his con¬ 
ceptions. But the act of selfishness in seeking the future 
heaven will prevent him from loving. Man may be 
guilty of an act of selfishness, but no blame should be 
attached to him in consequence of guilt. 


ARTICLE CLXXVIII. 

THE GOD OF DUTY. 

When man is free from selfishness, duty to him will 
be the same as the call of love. 



GOD 0 E RELICS, ETC. 


467 


ARTICLE CLXXIX. 

THE GOD OF RELICS. 

It is selfish to venerate the bones of the famous 
dead. 

It is selfish to venerate the graves, homes, or any 
relics of the dead. 

It is selfish to esteem any thing of value, because of 
its antiquity. 

It is selfish to esteem any thing of consequence, 
because it was once in the possession of the famous. 


ARTICLE CLXXX. 

THE GOD OF BLESSINGS. 

It is selfish in any one to seek for blessings. 

It was selfish in Christ to say that any one would be 
blessed. 

Blessings must refer to conditions ; and no one can 
seek conditions without forming a selfish attachment. 


ARTICLE CLXXX I. 

THE GOD OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

If by righteousness is meant that man conforms to a 
divine law or inspired precept, it is selfish to be 
righteous. 




468 


GOD OF SIN, ETC. 


ARTICLE CLXXXII. 

THE GOD OF SIN. 

It is selfish to suppose there can be any sin. 

It is selfish to teach that man can sin against God, 
Christ, or the Holy Ghost. 

It is selfish to teach that the devil and his angels 
can sin against God, Christ, or the Holy Ghost. 

It is selfish to teach that it is possible for any one, 
living or dead, to commit sin. 

Sin implies a moral agency, and that there are laws 
in the universe, and that man is acquainted with those 
laws, all of which it is impossible to prove. 


ARTICLE CLXXXIII. 

THE GOD OF GREAT MEN. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to see or to be in 
the society of persons because they are famous, have 
won a battle, are high in office, are kings, queens, 
presidents, governors, doctors of divinity, senators, 
judges, seers, prophets, great novel writers, great music 
composers, great reasoners, great authors, or are noted 
men or women of any description. 

It is an act of selfishness in governments, organi¬ 
zations, or individuals, to give to persons medals, 
swords, public dinners, or presents of any description, 
in token of respect, for any service, real or fancied, that 
may have been performed. 



PIOUS GOD, ETC. 


469 


It is an act of selfishness to make any public demon¬ 
stration in consequence of the death of the famous, by 
firing cannon, pronouncing eulogies, or by mourning 
apparel. 

It is an act of selfishness to commemorate the Lord’s 
Supper. 

It was an act of selfishness in Christ to institute the 
Lord’s Supper in commemoration of himself. 


ARTICLE CL XXX IY. 

THE PIOUS GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek for religion. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek for piety. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to commune with 
Christ, God, or the Holy Ghost. 


ARTICLE CLXXXY. 

THE GOD OF PITY. 

It is selfish to seek for pity. 

It is selfish to pity any one. 


ARTICLE CLXXXYI. 

THE GOD OF KINDNESS. 

An act of kindness is an act of selfishness when the 
person is influenced by selfish motives ; and an act of 
love, when acting from love. 


40 





470 


GOD OF PROTECTION, ETC. 


ARTICLE CL XXXVII. 

THE GOD OF PROTECTION. 

It is selfish in man to suppose that it is possible for 
him not to be protected in every moment of time. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say while on the 
cross, “ My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? ” 

It was an act of selfishness in Jesus Christ to pray to 
God when being crucified, by saying, “ Father, forgive 
them, for they know not what they do,” This prayer 
implies that it is possible for God to be angry with the 
enemies of Christ; it also implies that it was possible 
for the enemies of Christ not to be protected in future 
moments of time, both of which it is impossible to prove. 

It was selfish in Christ to intimate that any would 
wake up in the future world in hell and be in torment. 


ARTICLE CLXXXVIII. 

THELOCALGOD. 

It is selfish to prefer living in the future world to 
living in this. 

It is selfish to prefer the highest to the lowest sphere. 
It is selfish to prefer the New Jerusalem to Tartarus. 
It is selfish to prefer the city to the country. 

It is selfish to prefer the country to the city. 

It is selfish in man not to feel at home in one place 
in the universe as much as in another. 

It was selfish in Jesus Christ to say that in his 
Father’s house were many mansions. 



GOD OF DISGRACE, ETC. 


471 


ARTICLE CLXXXIX. 

THE GOD OF DISGRACE. 

It is selfish in man to accuse persons of having dis¬ 
graced themselves. 

It is selfish in man to say that any one ought to be 
ashamed. 

It is selfish in man to say that any one is a disgrace to 
any community, sect, creed, or organization of men. 

It is selfish in any person to feel any disgrace or 
shame for any thing they ever done. 

It is selfish in parents to tell their children that they 
ought to be ashamed. 


ARTICLE CXC. 

THE GOD OF AMUSEMENTS. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek amusement. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek for diversions or 
entertainments. 

It is selfish to suppose that amusement or recreation 
produces health more than the acts of love. 

It is selfish to seek for any pastime. 

It is selfish for invalids to seek for pastime. 


ARTICLE CXCI. 

THE GOD OF ENDEAVOR. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek to avoid doing an 
act of love. 

To be free, man should be always ready to perform 
an act of love. 




472 


CURIOUS GOD, ETC. 


ARTICLE CXCII. 

THE CURIOUS GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness to examine any thing from 
motives of curiosity. 

It is an act of selfishness to read in any newspaper or 
book from motives of curiosity or gratification. 

It is an act of selfishness to view paintings, pictures, 
or likenesses, for personal gratification. 

It is an act of selfishness to travel for personal gratifi¬ 
cation. 

It is an act of selfishness to investigate whether the 
dead can talk with the living for personal gratification 
or curiosity. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek any kind of infor¬ 
mation or knowledge for personal gratification or 
curiosity. 


ARTICLE CXCIII. 

THE INQUISITIVE GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to make any 
inquiries respecting any thing, except as an act of love. 


ARTICLE CXCIY. 

THE GOD OF RECREATION. 

If by recreation is meant that the overburdened can 
change to a lighter toil, it can be sought as an act of 
love. But, if by recreation is meant amusement, plea¬ 
sure, pastime, or personal gratification, it is an act of 
selfishness to seek it. 




JEALOUS GOD, 


ETC. 


473 


ARTICLE CXCY. 

THE JEALOUS GOD. 

It is selfish to be jealous. 

It was selfish in God to say that he was jealous. 
It is selfish to teach that God is jealous. 


ARTICLE CXCYI. 

THE GOD OF GLORY. 

It is selfish to seek glory. 

It is selfish to give glory to any person. 

It is selfish to give glory to God. 

It is selfish in God to seek or ask for glory. 


ARTICLE CXCYII. 

THE HONORABLE GOD. 

It is selfish in any one to seek for honor. 


ARTICLE CXCYIII. 

THE ACCOMMODATING GOD. 

It is selfish to accommodate any one when influenced 
by selfish motives ; and it is an act of love when influenced 
by love. 


40* 





474 


MODEST GOD, ETC. 


ARTICLE CXCIX. 

THE MODEST GOD. 

It is selfish to seek to be modest. 

It is an act of selfishness to commend modesty. 


ARTICLE CC. 

THE GOD OF PURITY. 

It is selfish to seek for purity in order to see God. 

It is selfish to seek for purity in order to see the angels. 

It is selfish to seek for purity in order to go to the 
highest sphere. 

It is selfish to seek for purity in order to go to heaven. 

It is selfish to seek for purity in order to converse 
with the dead. 

It is selfish to seek for purity in order to be free, unless 
that freedom arises from love. 


ARTICLE CCI. 

THE ARISTOCRATIC GOD. 

It is selfish to seek to be refined. 

It is selfish to seek to associate with the first classes 
of society. 

It is selfish to prefer any one class of society to that 
of another. 



RESPECTABLE GOD, ETC. 


475 


ARTICLE CCII. 

THE RESPECTABLE GOD. 

It is selfish to seek for respectability. 


ARTICLE CCIII. 

THE ECONOMICAL GOD. 

It is as selfish in man to seek to be economical as it 
is to seek to be extravagant. It is selfish in man to 
spend money for any thing he does not need; and he 
may be called on to give away every thing as fast as he 
obtains it, from his love. It is selfish in man to deny 
himself any thing from motives of economy. It is selfish 
in man to deny any one any thing from motives of 
economy. 


ARTICLE CCIY. 

THE GOD OF WORSHIP . 

It is selfish in God to seek to be worshipped. 
It is selfish to worship God. 


ARTICLE CCY. 

THE GOD OF CUSTOM. 

It is selfish to seek to conform to any custom. 





476 


GOD OF HABIT , ETC. 


ARTICLE CCVI. 

THE GOD OF HABIT. 

Every habit is selfish. 


ARTICLE CCYII. 

THE INTEMPERATE GOD. 

It is selfish to eat or drink any thing for personal 
gratification. 

It is selfish to drink tea or coffee for personal 
gratification. 

It is selfish to drink wine or water for personal 
gratification. 

It is selfish to smoke tobacco or opium. 

It is selfish to chew tobacco or gum. 


ARTICLE CCVIII. 

THE REFERENCE GOD. 

It is an act of selfishness in man to refer to God, the 
Bible, Christ, or to any past hero, alive or dead, to con¬ 
vince a person that any opinion is true, when the indi¬ 
vidual is supposed to act from any one or all of these as 
authority. 



GOD OF THE IMAGINATION, ETC. 477 


ARTICLE ccrx. 

THE GOD OF THE IMAGINATION AND FANCY. 

Every effort of the imagination or fancy is an act of 
selfishness. It is as selfish to say any thing that is under¬ 
stood to be false, as when it is not. 

To describe scenery is an act of selfishness, when it is 
a creation from the imagination. All descriptions of 
characters in novels, stories, or poetry, are acts of self¬ 
ishness. 

To write poetry is an act of selfishness. 

It is selfish to seek to read any work of the imagina¬ 
tion or fancy. 

It is selfish to teach that David was an inspired 
psalmist. 

It was selfish in Christ to teach the people by means 
of parables. 

It is selfish to seek to teach any one by fables. 


ARTICLE CCX. 

THE GOD OF FORGIVENESS. 

It is selfish in man to ask the forgiveness of God. 

It is selfish in man to ask the forgiveness of his 
brother or sister for any thing. 

It is selfish in man to acknowledge to another that he 
has done any wrong. 

It is selfish in God to forgive sins. 

It was selfish in Christ to forgive sins. 



478 


GOD OF BAPTISM, ETC. 


ARTICLE CCXI. 

THE GOD OF BAPTISM. 

Every ceremony of baptising is an act of selfishness ; 
because it is for the purpose of imposing authority. 

It was an act of selfishness in John the Baptist to 
baptize Jesus Christ. 

It was an act of selfishness in the voice from heaven 
to say at the time of Christ’s baptism, that Jesus Christ 
was a beloved Son. 

It was an act of selfishness in John the Baptist to say 
that Christ would baptize with fire and with the Holy 
Ghost. 


ARTICLE CCXII. 

THE GOD OF PREACHING. 

It is an act of selfishness to preach Christ and his 
crucifixion. 

It is an act of selfishness to preach that Christ is the 
Savior of the world. 

It is an act of selfishness to preach that God sent Jesus 
Christ into the world. 

It is an act of selfishness to preach that the J ews were 
the chosen people of God. 

It is an act of selfishness to preach that the Bible is 
an infallible book. 

It is selfish in man to seek to hear any one preach 
any thing that it is an act of selfishness to teach. 


GOD OF VISIONS, ETC. 


479 


ARTICLE CCXIII. 

THE GOD OF VISIONS. 

It is an act of selfishness in any one to presume that 
what is seen or taught from “ visions,” “ interior con¬ 
ditions,” or “ clairvoyant states,” is any more reliable 
or certain than what is seen or taught under any other 
circumstances. All instances of “ visions ” have their 
determinations through the selfish attachments, or through 
the loves of the individuals seeing them. 

It was selfish in Peter to declare every thing common 
because he had seen a vision to that effect. 

It is selfish in any person to do any thing because 
he has been directed by a vision. 


ARTICLE CCXIY. 

THE GOD OF PREMIUMS. 

It is an act of selfishness to seek for any premium on 
any thing. 

It is an act of selfishness to offer any premium or 
prize for any thing. 


ARTICLE CCXV. 

THE GOD OF SPEECH. 

It is selfish to be attached to any cant words. 

It is selfish to be attached to any author on account 
of style. 




480 


CHOOSING GOD. 


It is selfish, to be attached to the rules of grammar or 
rhetoric. 

It is selfish in man to speak because he can use good 
language. 

It is selfish to be attached to any public speakers on 
account of their pleasing address. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to one class of sing¬ 
ing more than another. 

A call of love that interferes with any attachment 
will make man unhappy, while he should see in it his 

j°y- 


ARTICLE CCXYI. 

THE CHOOSING GOD. 

Has man an attachment for his trade ? 

Would man rather make hay than mow ? 

Would man rather sow wheat than to plant corn ? 

Would man rather be a clerk in a store than to work 
on a farm ? 

Would man rather dig for iron ore than to use the 
needle ? 

Would man rather saw wood than to plead his case 
at court ? 

Although man may not feel fit to do some kinds of 
work because he has not learned; but if for any 
particular kind of work he has an attachment in 
preference to another, it will interfere with acts of love. 
If bred a farmer he should be called on to speak in 
public as an act of love, and he would be thinking how 
much better others could do it, there would be no joy 


SUPERSTITIOUS GOD, ETC. 481 

in the act. It makes no difference whether he is 
capable or not of doing any thing. Joy is with him if 
he makes the endeavor as an act of love. He can not 
be free if he hesitates when he sees any thing to be done 
as an act of love. Man can wait for an accomplished 
hand to do things through love, but if he should be 
called on to do the same things, he must have no 
attachments that would make him unhappy in doing 
them. 


ARTICLE CCXYII. 

THE SUPERSTITIOUS GOD. 

Ought a man to see the moon over his left shoulder ? 
Ought a man to plant in the right time of the moon ? 
It is an act of selfishness in man to heed any sign or 
wonder that has no foundation except in a superstitious 
fear or love from the past. 


ARTICLE CCXVIII. 

THE SELECTING GOD. 

Would man like to marry a lady with a good form ? 
Is there any particular piece of composition man 
would read to his friend ? 

If man ,s going a journey will he take with him a 
certain companion ? 

Is there any thing that man will do on a rainy day ? 
Would man wear velvet instead of silk ? 


41 



482 


S ELECTING GOD . 


Would man cover his roof with slate instead of pine 
shingles ? 

Ought a man’s clothing to come from a fashionable 
place ? 

Ought a man’s carriage be made by the best workmen ? 

Ought the most noted publishers publish a man’s 
book ? 

Ought a man have a good cook ? 

Ought a man to have the best flour ? 

Ought a man to have a good horse ? 

Ought a man to hire workmen cheaper than any one 
else ? 

Ought one to keep the ring of a departed wife or 
husband ? 

Ought any one to will to man any particular things ? 

What kind of carpets would a person have ? 

What colored silk becomes a person best ? 

Ought people to be married by a Justice of the Peace ? 

Ought one’s betrothed to accompany other men or 
women ? 

Ought ladies or gentlemen to attract one’s attention ? 

Ought one’s harnesses be silver mounted ? 

Any thing that man thinks belongs to him in 
preference, calls from him a selfish attachment. Man 
may desire a certain quality of food and clothing, but it 
may be as an act of love he should take an inferior 
quality; therefore, if he has an attachment for one in 
preference to the other, he can not be free. 


GOD OF POSSESSIONS, ETC. 


483 


ARTICLE CCXIX. 

THE GOD OF POSSESSIONS. 

It is selfish in man to feel that he must always make 
a good bargain. 

It is selfish in man to feel that he must keep the 
amount of property which he now has. 

It is selfish in man to feel that he must add to his 
gains every year. 


ARTICLE CCXX. 

THE GOD OF METHOD. 

Does man wish for his meals at such an hour ? 

If one writes discourses, is he attached to any 
particular divisions ? 

Does man feel that he must not work on Sundays ? 

Is man attached to the holidays ? 

Does a man wish to retire at such an hour ? 

Does a man wish to go to the theatre once a week ? 

One may know method as an act of love to accomplish 
his work, but if he becomes attached to systematic ways 
of acting in any thing, acts of love might interrupt 
them; and the act of love that interrupts a selfish 
attachment produces grief. 


ARTICLE CCXXI. 

THE GOD OF APPETITE. 

Must one have coffee for breakfast ? 
Must one have pies for dinner ? 




484 


GOD OF LAWS, ETC. 


Does one wish to eat meat on certain occasions ? 

Will one give more for certain kinds of fruit ? 

Does one wish for wine after a meal ? 

Will one travel some distance to eat one kind of 
soup ? 

One can partake of different kinds of food as an act 
of love, but if he feels an attachment to any kinds of 
food, he should seek to overcome it. 


AETICLE CCXXIL 

THE GOD OF LAWS. 

Does man feel dependent on the laws of his country 
for protection ? 

Will man do business in a legal manner ? 

Must a particular form be necessary in making a will ? 

Man can give attention to legal forms and methods, 
but should seek to overcome any attachment he may 
have for them. 


AETICLE CCXXIII. 

THE GOD OF USAGE. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to the rules of his 
profession in doing business. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to the rules of his 
trade in performing labor. 

It is selfish to be attached to the customs of exchange. 

It is selfish to be attached to any method of buying 
and selling. 




GOD OF CEREMONY, ETC. 


485 


ARTICLE CCXXIY. 

THE GOD OF CEREMONY. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to any particular 
method of conducting services in church. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to the method of 
initiating any one into any society. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to any method of 
receiving company. 

It is selfish in man to be attached to any ceremonies 
performed on public occasions. 


ARTICLE CCXXY. 

THE GOD OF EMOTION. 

Has man a joke to tell his friend ? 

Has man a story that will excite wonder ? 

Has man a dreadful accident to relate ? 

Has man a humorous incident to tell ? 

All that interferes with acts of love should be left off 
through the faith that they prevent joy. 


ARTICLE CCXXYI. 

THE GOD OF PLANS. 

Does man plan to do a certain amount of labor on a 
certain day ? 

Does man plan to start on a journey at such an hour ? 
Would man hold the head of any one that is dying ? 


41 * 




486 


GOD OF PLANS. 


Would man take a certain kind of medicine and be 
cured of his disease ? 

Will one be free from the solicitations of certain per¬ 
sons after such a time ? 

Would one write a letter at such an hour ? 

Would one read the news when the mail arrives ? 

Would one live in the country for a while ? 

Has man set a particular time to read in some book ? 

Has one been invited to some social entertainment 
with friends ? 

Has man specified any time in which he will hear 
some speaker ? 

Has man set a day in which he will go into the coun- 
try ? 

Has man any time set to receive company ? 

On such a day will one move into a new dwelling ? 

The changes of life may prevent man from doing 
what he anticipates ; and hence, if man does not con¬ 
stantly suppose that what does take place is for the 
good of all, he can not be free. 

It is selfish in man to expect any joy from the accom¬ 
plishment of plans. He should not suppose what he 
thinks would be a manifestation of love should take 
place, for this faith gives to him an attachment for 
future conditions. It is selfish to plan with reference 
to preferred conditions. Although man may plan as an 
act of love, he should separate himself from the accom¬ 
plishment of those plans, as far as joy or misery is con¬ 
cerned, and always retain the faith that every thing that 
does take place, is a manifestation of love. The free in 
planning, presume what would be a manifestation of love, 
but it can not be established in their minds as a mani- 


GOD OF EXCITEMENT, ETC. 


487 


festation of love until it has taken place, or until it is 
to them a certainty. If man has any selfish anticipa¬ 
tions he is likely to meet with disappointment. If man 
anticipates any joy, more than what he possesses in the 
present moments of existence, it is selfish, because he 
can not anticipate it except from some selfish love. It 
is selfish in man to fear that he shall not possess all 
that he should in the future; because with this fear he 
can not hav.e faith that the infinity of action is a man¬ 
ifestation of love. It is selfish in man to expect any 
more joy in the future than he possesses in the present 
moment, or to have any fears. 


ARTICLE CCXXVII. 

THE GOD OF EXCITEMENT. 

Is man startled when the death of friends are told him? 

Does man become excited at the cry of fire ? 

Does one cry out at meeting any animal ? 

Are there any epithets that man uses when he receives 
an injury ? 

Is it possible for man to lose his self-control under 
any circumstances of danger ? 

There is no excitement among the free, for every 
thing that takes place is a manifef$htion of love. 


ARTICLE CCXXVIII. 

THE DISAGREEABLE GOD. 

Are there any visitors man does not wish to see ? 
Are there any places man does not like to go ? 



488 


GOD OF PREJUDICES, ETC. 


Is any part of man’s labor disagreeable to him ? 

If man will be free, he must strive to see in every 
event or circumstance of life the good of all. 


ARTICLE CCXXIX. 

THE GOD OF PREJUDICES. 

Is man visited by any person whom he does not 
receive as an act of love ? 

Does man differ with any persons in belief with whom 
he can not talk as an act of love ? 

Are there any persons man would avoid on account 
of their reputatiou ? 

Has man been injured by any person to whom he can 
not go as an act of love ? 

Man must be without prejudices in order to be free. 


ARTICLE CCXXX. 

THE SELFISH GODS. 

It is as selfish to worship one God as another; for 
every God is an object of selfish attachment or dread. 
It is as selfish in man to worship an imaginary being, 
that he calls the Supine God, as to worship apy other 
God of which he can have a conception. There is no 
difficulty in going from one selfish attachment to another. 
Man can give up his lands in one country for the sake 
of richer lands in another. Man can give up his houses 
here for the sake of an imperishable house in the future 
world. Man can relinquish the desire to be governor. 




SELFISH GODS. 


489 


for the desire to live forever in the presence of God. 
Man can relinquish his feelings of dependence on 
the rich to feel dependent on his God, when he 
believes his God to be more certain. Man can give up 
a house to secure a palace. Man can give up earthly 
things to secure heavenly things. But man, to be free, 
should relinquish his superior and inferior, great and 
small, good and evil, earthly and heavenly, Gods. He 
should give up his earthly and heavenly mansions ; 
his material and heavenly pleasures; his Gods of this 
world and his Gods of the future world ; his God of 
transient joys and his God of eternity; his God of 
civilization here and his God of the New Jerusalem 
hereafter ; his God of earthly and his God of heavenly 
treasures ; his God of heaven and his God of hell; his 
God of the righteous and his God of the damned; his 
God of the church and his God of harlots ; his God of 
angels and his God of devils ; his God of exalted and 
his God of degraded beings. 

Can man give up all his Gods and be free ? It is 
not liberty to give up one God to know another. It is 
not liberty to give up the God of money in this world 
for the God of heavenly mansions in the future. It is 
not liberty to give up this world for the higher life. It 
is not liberty to give up Christ and adopt the ancient 
dead. It is not liberty to avoid hell, the lowest sphere, 
or Tartarus* for heaven, the highest sphere, or the New 
Jerusalem. It is not liberty to reject three Gods and 
adopt one. It is not liberty to go from the God of a 
partial to the God of a universal salvation. Liberty is 
freedom from selfishness. Liberty is love. Liberty is 
a rejection of all selfish loves and attachments. Liberty 


490 


ACTS OF SELFISHNESS. 


is love that does not increase or diminish ; does not 
progress or retrograde ; is never in need of reform, 
charity, patience, or self-denial. This liberty can not 
be interrupted, for it will give the same joy among the 
bones of the dead as among the flowers in paradise ; on 
the desert sands as on the green earth ; in mansions in 
this world as in mansions in the future. 


ARTICLE CCXXXI. 

THE ACTS OF SELFISHNESS. 

Every motive to action is selfish that is not from love. 
Every action is an act of selfishness that is not an act of 
love. Many things, to the conception of man, may be 
good while they are selfish. Man, in a condition of 
selfishness, may have a conception of love without change, 
but he is not likely to perceive in one moment all his 
selfish attachments. But man, in seeking for liberty, 
sees all his acts to be selfish that conflict with the new 
standards to which he is constantly arriving, and from 
which he reasons. Man can not avoid remembering his 
acts of selfishness and his attachments, in preference to 
other things ; because they are to him always events of 
importance, and they cease to become such when he has 
overcome his selfishness. If man is seeking pleasure, 
he recurs with feelings of gratification to any pleasure 
enjoyed in the past. If he believes pleasure to be self¬ 
ish, he does not seek to recall instances of pleasure¬ 
seeking to his mind. But every thing that has been 
selfishly sought or dreaded, must be retained in the 




ACTS OF SELFISHNESS. 


491 


memory of man until he has freed himself of them as 
selfish attachments. When man is free, he is no more 
likely to remember one event in the past than another ; 

but in a condition of selfishness will seek to recall all 

* 

acts of the past that seem pleasing, and seek to avoid all 
that appear disagreeable. But both the pleasing and dis¬ 
agreeable acts will be acts of selfishness; and for the 
pleasing acts man will have a selfish attachment, and for 
the disagreeable acts a selfish dread. A selfish dread is 
in consequence of a selfish attachment. If man leaves 
one selfish attachment and adopts a conflicting attach¬ 
ment, he dreads one after the degree of his selfish love 
for the other. Man may leave one selfish attachment 
for another, believing that the first prevents joy ; but in 
adopting a new selfish attachment he has not diminished 
his bondage, for he selfishly loves and selfishly dreads. 
When man is free from selfishness, he must see all the 
incidents and events of his life as*a manifestation of love ; 
but as long as he is selfish he must have fears, and also 
must remember pleasing and disagreeable acts of the 
past. Man, when he is free, must have faith that the 
acts of selfishness, taking place every where, are equally 
a manifestation of love in the infinity of causes and effects. 
All the action of infinity is a manifestation of love to the 
free, or else there is no liberty. It is in the power of 
man to demonstrate what is liberty from the standard of 
love, but it is not in the power of man to prove that self¬ 
ishness is any better than love, although he can demon¬ 
strate that selfishness is bondage. Man has a conception 
of a selfish act because he adopts the standard of love; 
but in saying that any action is selfish, he should never 


492 


ACTS OF SELFISHNESS. 


forget that every action, whether selfish or not, is a mani¬ 
festation of love. The acts of selfishness that have and 
are to take place, are as necessary as the acts of love ; 
for, if one action did not take place as it did, nothing 
could take place as it should. Man can demonstrate 
that one action is as much a manifestation of love as 
another; and also demonstrate that unless man has faith 
in love, that he can not find uninterrupted joy. Man 
has a conception of love and selfishness, but he can not 
prove them to be realities, although they are facts to him 
equal to the conscious fact of existence. Man, in reality, 
can not trace the causes and effects of any thing ; yet he 
determines, in definite localities and in given points of 
time, what are acts of selfishness and what are acts of 
love; but he can not determine tha£ one act more than 
another has its origin in an act of selfishness any more 
than in an act of love. Man can determine that in doing 
a thing he acted from motives of selfishness, and 
that this selfishness brought to him fear and misery ; 
but he can not determine that the causes that induced 
him to act had their origin any more in selfishness than 
in love. Man can show that in acting from motives 
of selfishness the act itself is as much a manifestation of 
love, — being connected with the infinity of causes and 
effects, — as if he were to act from motives of love. 
Hence, if any action in infinity is a manifestation of love, 
all action in infinity is a manifestation of love. There¬ 
fore, the acts of selfishness and their effects are as much 
a manifestation of love as are the acts of love and their 
effects. To say that any one action is a manifestation 
of selfishness, is the same as saying that all action is a 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 493 


manifestation of selfishness ; and to say that all action is 
a manifestation of selfishness, is the same as saying that 
all action is a manifestation of love. 


ARTICLE CCXXXII. 

OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

1. If a man murmurs about any thing that ever 
• took place, he is not free. 

If a man would have sorrow because of any 
condition in which he might be placed, he is not free. 

3. If a man would have sorrow because he was 
obliged to devote his time to any of the duties of life, 
he is not free. 

4. If a man would murmur if he were cheated, 
reviled, persecuted, or defamed, he is not free. 

5. If a man does not see in every thing that takes 
place the action of love, he is not free. 

6. If a man feels that the acts or conditions of others 
are antagonistic to himself, he is not free. 

7. If there is any event of life that is unpleasant for 
man to think about, he is not free. 

8. If a man has any fear about property, reputation, 
or pleasures, he is not free. 

9. If man thinks he has any excuse for doing an act 
of selfishness, he is not free. 

10. If man would judge himself to others, he is 
not free. 

11. If a man would laugh at any human weakness, 

4 2 



494 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

obscene story or act, witty or satirical saying, he is 
not free. 

12. If there is any thing that is disagreeable for man 
to see, he is not free. 

13. If any condition of life would produce in man 
disagreeable sensations, he is not free. 

14. If there are any positions in -which animals could 
be placed that would produce in man laughter or 
disgust, he is not free. 

IB. If there is any thing that could frighten man, he 
is not free. 

16. If a man would imitate any action of the passions, 
he is not free. 

17. If a man does not strive to see love in all evil 
that takes place, he is not free. 

18. If a man does not strive to see love in his past 
acts of selfishness, he is not free. 

19 If a man would murmur in anticipation of any 
evil that might take place, he is not free. 

20. If a man would seek his own praise, he is not free. 

21. If the world should call a man beautiful, and he 
would feel gratified, he is not free. 

22. If any of the accidents of life can make man 
weep, he is not free. 

23. If a man would speak of any one in order to 
praise or degrade him, he is not free. 

24. If any crime would cause man to withhold his 
love, he is not free. 

25. If a man would speak or write so as to exalt or 
degrade himself, he is not free. 

26. If a man could do good, and would neglect to 
do it, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 495 

27. If a man would let any burthen, when there was 
no cause to prevent his carrying it, pass to the hands of 
another, he is not free. 

28. If there is any kind of labor a man would not 
do, on account of the opinion of society, he is not free. 

29. If any one should ask a man for favors, and he 
would refuse on account of prejudices, he is not free. 

30. If a man would deter any one who might start to 
do an act of love, he is not free. 

31. If a man feels that good would be done by 
giving, and does not give, he is not free. 

32. If a man would solicit help in giving to needy 
persons, when he could assist them without aid, he is 
not free. 

33. If a man would seek to be in the first seats or 
places in preference to others, he is not free. 

34. If a man would listen to one class of people 
sooner than to another, he is not free. 

35. If a man should wish, if he was caring for his 
sick father, mother, brother, child, sister, friend, or 
enemy, that he had a lighter burthen, he is not free. 

36. If there is any position in which man could be 
placed with the opposite sex that would excite his 
passions, he is not free. 

37. If a man should be flattered, and would think of 
himself instead of others’ good, he is not free. 

38. If a man would go to any place where he would 
deny others from going, he is not free. 

39. If repeated interruptions in any thing in which a 
man could be engaged would annoy him, he is not free. 

40. If any news of the loss of friends, reputation, or 
property, could annoy man, he is not free. 


496 OUST RUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

41. If, being sick, a man would wish to be cured, 
because of the pain and inconvenience, he is not free. 

42 . If, in giving to others a new love, man would 
contend, judge others, be afraid that truth would suffer, 
or that he would lose the advantage in argument, he is 
not free. 

43. If a man can not see joy in the present moment 
of his existence, he is not free. 

44. If a man does not manifest in every act of life 
his love, he is not free. 

45. If a man would instruct any one in any thing, 
and not manifest his love, he is not free. 

46. If a man would do any thing for another, and 
would not do it as an act of love, he is not free. 

47 . If a man would do business, and not do it as an 
act of love, he is not free. 

48. If a man would invite others to do things, when 
he, in doing the same, would become impatient, he is 
is not free. 

49. If a man would let any one pass him, when he 
might think a word of love would do him good, he is 
not free. 

50. If a man would neglect to give to those who 
might be in need of what he could give, he is not free. 

51. If a man would go to any place for pleasure, he 
is not free. 

52 . If a man should go to any place to lecture, and 
would think what others would say of him, he is not free. 

53. If a man would tell the world that he possessed 
a noble faith, he is not free. 

54. If a man would tell others that his example was 
good, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 497 

55. If a man would say to the world that his belief 
was better than any other, he is not free. 

56. If a man would praise persons because they 
believed as himself, he is not free. 

57. If a man would tell persons they had done 
wrong, he is not free. 

58. If man would tell others, if they would believe 
as himself they would be free, he is not free. 

59. If a man would say to others that any form of 
worship was better than another, he is not free. 

60. If a man would say to the world that any people 
were more acceptable to God than others, he is not free. 

61. If a man would cast any reproach on any one, he 
is not free. 

62. If a man should hear evil of any one, and would 
again repeat it, he is not free. 

63. If a man would speak or write in a depreciating 
manner of any one, he is not free. 

64. If a man would cast any Reproach on the mur¬ 
derer, robber, seducer, or the incendiary, he is not free. 

65. If a man would say that he was appointed to 
give truth more than another, he is not free. 

66. If a man would say to the world that he 
belonged with the pure, he is not free. 

67. If a man would say to any class of people that 
he was their appointed leader, he is not free. 

68. If a man would urge the sale of books, pamph¬ 
lets, or newspapers that had his belief in preference to 
others, he is not free. 

69. If a man would take money, when it would seem 
that he was better able to do without than the payer to 
give, he is not free. 


42* 


498 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

70. If a man would withhold any information from 
others for the sake of a larger compensation, he is not free. 

71. If a man would watch the ways in which gold 
might come to him, he is no t free. 

12. If a man would withhold truth, thinking the 
world was not prepared for it, he is not free. 

73. If evil should be circulated about man, and it 
would annoy him, he is not free. 

74. If a man would defend his character against evil 
reports, he is not free. 

75. If a man would speak or write of himself, when 
it would not be an act of love, he is not free. 

76. If a man would seek the sale of books, pamph¬ 
lets, or newspapers containing his belief, because he had 
a pecuniary interest in them, he is not free. 

77. If a man would receive for his services more 
than seemed to him necessary, he is not free. 

78. If a man would say that he would gain his 
living from any particular source, he is not free. 

79. If a man would defend his belief, he is not free. 

80. If a man would say to others he taught the truth, 
he is not free. 

81. If a man would speak to children not as an act 
of love, he is not free. 

8£. If a man would threaten children with punish¬ 
ment, he is not free. 

83. If a man would threaten any one with the with¬ 
drawal of his love, he is not free. 

84. If a man would assume authority over any one, 
he is not free. 

85. If a man would speak to any one in an impatient 
manner, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 499 


8(5. If a man would dictate to any one what should 
be their belief, he is not free. 

87. If a man would dictate to any one what they 
should do or say, he is not free. 

88. If a man would seek to punish any one, he is 
not free. 

89. If a man would do good by means of shame, he 
is not free. 

90. If a man would teach any one by means of 
rewards, he is not free. 

91. If, having children, man would unnecessarily 
leave them in the care of others, he is not free. 

92. If, having children, a man would give the care 
of them to a teacher who did not love them, he is not 
free. 

93. If, having children, a man would seek release 
from the care of them, except as an act of love, he is 
not free. 

94. If, having children, a man would be unwilling to 
take them to any place where he was willing to go, he 
is not free. 

95. If, having children, a man would deny them from 
going with him from any selfish motive, he is not free. 

96. If a man would laugh at the deeds of children, 
he is not free. 

97. If, from selfish motives, a man would deny chil¬ 
dren from occupying the same couch with him, he is 
not free. 

98. If a man would withhold any information from 
children, except as an act of love, he is not free. 

99. If a man would play tricks with any one, he is 
not free. 


500 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

100. If any one could call on man to do any thing, 
and it would give him anxiety, he is not free. 

101. If a man thinks joys are designed for him more 
than others, he is not free. 

102. If a man thinks joys are designed more for any 
class of believers than for others, he is not free. 

103. If a man thinks one is protected more than 
another, he is not free. 

104. If a man would partake of food for pleasure, or 
one class of food more than another for the sake of 
appetite, he is not free. 

105. If a man would tell the faults of others, he is 
not free. 

106. If, when hearing the faults of others, man 
would say any thing, except as an act of love of the 
persons mentioned, he is not free. 

107. If a man is anticipating joy in the future, he is 
not free. 

108. If a man would learn any thing for pleasure, 
he is not free. 

109. If a man would dread to do any kind of labor, 
he is not free. 

110. If a man could not see joy in any kind of labor 
in which he might be engaged, he is not free. 

111. If a man would be unwilling to sacrifice his 
property for his highest conception of duty, he is not 
free. 

112. If a man would be unwilling to give up his 
friends, and every pleasure, for his highest conception 
of duty, he is not free. 

113. If a man would be unwilling to suffer torture 
for his highest conception of duty, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTION S TO FREEDOM. 501 

114. If any knowledge of the future would annoy 
man, he is not free. 

115. If a man would regret any thing that he or 
others ever did, he is not free. 

116. If any hour in time could be given in which 
man should know that some calamity would befall him, 
and he would dread the approach of that hour, he is 
not free. 

117. If a prophecy of the time and manner of 
death would annoy man, he is not free. 

118. If disappointments would annoy man, be is not 
free. 

119. If it should be prophesied that a man should 
be famous or rich, and he should believe it, and after¬ 
wards know that it could not be, and he would be 
annoyed, he is not free. 

120. If a man should know that his name would 
never be mentioned except as being a traitor, murderer, 
or seducer, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

121. If, having children, a man should know that 
his daughters would become harlots, and his sons 
murderers, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

122. If a man would do less for persons because he 
should hear some evil of them, he is not free. 

128. If, being married, a man should know that 
his wife would be with child by another, and he 
would be annoyed, he is not free. 

124. If, being married, a man should know that his 
wife would will property to his enemy, and he would 
be annoyed, he is not free. 

125. If the knowledge that the countenance of man 
should be disfigured would annoy him, he is not free. 


502 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


126. If the knowledge that any season of scarcity 
should come, would cause a man to be selfish, he is not 
free. 

127. If the knowledge that a man should become 
deaf, dumb, blind, or insane, would annoy him, he is 
not free. 

128. If the knowledge that a man should beg, would 
annoy him, he is not free. 

129. If the knowledge that a man should be impris¬ 
oned or executed, would annoy him, he is not free. 

130. If the knowledge that a man shall be buried 
alive, would annoy him, he is not free. 

131. If the knowledge that man would be buried in 
the sea, would annoy him, he is not free. 

132. If the knowledge, that man should have any 
disease, would annoy him, he is not free. 

133. If a man should be in the society of those who 
contend and would be annoyed, he is not free. 

134. If any strife of friends or enemies would annoy 
man, he is not free. 

135. If man could be provoked, he is not free. 

136. If man could do any thing except as an act of 
love, to cause others anxiety, he is not free. 

137. If a man would do any thing to tell others he 
was good, he is not free. 

138. If a man would do any thing to tell others how 
noble his neighbor was, except as an act of love, he is 
not free. 

139. If a man would speak disparagingly of any per¬ 
son who might give advice, he is not free. 

140. If a man would refuse to share with others any 
thing he might have and they could need, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 503 


141. If a man would refuse to do any thing for ene¬ 
mies that would be an act of love, he is not free. 

142. If a man would be married for any other pur¬ 
pose except from his love, he is not free. 

143. If man should be called upon to do any labor 
that was usually performed by the opposite sex, and he 
would be annoyed, he is not free. 

144. If, having many children, more should be given 
into man’s care,*and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

145. If a man should bear burthens, and the increas¬ 
ing of them would annoy him, he is not free. 

146. If, while caring for many relatives, more of 
them should come to be cared for, and man would 
be annoyed, he is not free. 

147. If, in caring for others, a man would think they 
were not equal to himself, he is not free. 

148. If a man would seek for any information for 
curiosity, he is not free. 

149. If any person could will his property so that 
it would annoy man, he is not free. 

150. If, being engaged to be married, that engage¬ 
ment could be broken, and man would be annoyed, he 
is not free. 

151. If being unmarried, man would have fears that 
he should remain so, he is not free. 

152. If being unmarried, man would be annoyed if 
he was to remain so, he is not free. 

153. If an enemy could marry the one a man should 
like, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

154. If circumstances should compel a man to marry 
a person he would not choose, and he would be annoyed, 
he is not free. 


504 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

155. If any one, to whom man could be engaged to be 
married, could continue to put off the time of marriage 
until he was old, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

156. If man could marry any one, and afterwards 
know that the object of his choice was guilty of evils, 
and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

157. If man could marry any one and afterwards 
know that the person had married him for his wealth, 
and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

158. If man, being married, his wife would refuse to 
occupy the same couch with him, and he would be 
annoyed, he is not free. 

159. If any degrading proposal should be made to 
man respecting his wife or children, and he would be 
annoyed, he is not free. 

160. If any degrading proposal should be made to 
man of his father or mother, and he would be annoyed, 
he is not free. 

161. If the murder or seduction of any that are dear 
to man would annoy him, he is not free. 

162. If man would feel shame for any past act, he is 
not free. 

163. If man should be in the society of any that should 
know of his selfish acts, and would feel shame, he is not 
free. 

164. If man could make a degrading proposal to 
persons, and afterwards feel shame in their presence, he 
is not free. 

165. If man could murder, and would afterwards 
feel annoyed at being pointed at, he is not free. 

166. If a fortune suddenly coming into a man’s hands 
would give him joy, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 505 


167. If man’s name coming before the world as noble 
and pure would give him joy, he is not free. 

168. If persons should injure a man, and he would 
feel any pleasure in having them ask his forgiveness, 
he is not free. 

169. If man’s possession of wealth or fame should 
give sadness to his enemies, and this would give to him 
pleasure, he is not free. 

170. If man should think any thing he could say or 
write would produce astonishment, and it would give 
him joy, he is not free. 

171 If man could be engaged in any thing in wdiich 
his selfish loves w r ere involved, and he should think at 
any moment, while thus engaged, that it would be an 
act of love to cease, and could not do so, he is not free. 

172. If it would require the exercise of self-denial in 
man to do any thing, he is not free. 

173. If man should be in a condition of suffering, and 
would be obliged to exercise patience, he is not free. 

174. If man, thinking he had much truth, should 
seek to give it to the world, and should know that no 
cne would give any attention to it in his lifetime, and 
he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

175. If it would require the exercise of patience in 
man to bear any burthens that might be forced on him, 
he is not free. 

176. If any opportunity should occur to man for the 
indulgence of appetite, and he would be under the neces¬ 
sity of using self-denial to keep from it, he is not free. 

177. If any one of the opposite sex should come to 
man for sexual indulgence, and he would be obliged to 
use self-denial to keep from it, he is not free. 


43 


506 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


178. If man should be married, and be obliged to use 
self-denial to keep from indulgence, he is not free. 

179. If man would be among the pure because he 
expected to know higher joys of sexual intercourse or 
of appetite, he is not free. 

180. If man should expect to be cured of any disease, 
and afterwards learn that it was incurable, and it would 
annoy him, he is not free. 

181. If what any person could say or think of man 
could annoy him, he is not free. 

182. If there is any one that could §ay any thing in a 
man’s praise, and it would give to him pleasure, he is 
not free. 

183. If there is any one that could praise man in his 
presence, and it would give him pleasure or annoyance, 
he is not free. 

184. If any one should defame man by lecturing or 
public journals, and he would be annoyed, he is not 
free. 

185. If man would seek to answer any imputations 
made against him, he is not free. 

186. If man would go to places that departed spirits 
might tell of his good qualities, he is not free. 

187. If man would seek to be with any one because 
their name was more known to the world, he is not free. 

188. If man would seek to give the world the names 

of the famous dead, as having talked with him, he is not 
free. # 

189. If man would use the names of the dead for any 
selfish end, he is not free. 

190. If man would give descriptions of departed 
beings to tell others he had seen them, he is not free. 



OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


507 


191. If man would give any descriptions of the 
departed, except as an act of love, he is not free. 

192. If man would use the names of the dead in his 
writings, to give them authority, he is not free. 

193. If man would write to tell the world that he had 
talked with the pure, he is not free. 

194. If man would write on subjects to tell the world 
he knew more about them than others, he is not free. 

195. If man would write to noted persons, in prefer¬ 
ence to others, he is not free. 

196. If man would think the world ought to know 
of his travels or labors in preference to others, he is not 
free. 

197. If man would write to bring the name of his 
friend before the world, he is not free. 

198. If while writing, man would have in his mind 
persons to whom his writings w^ould apply, and it would 
give him pleasure, he is not free. 

199. If man w r ould seek to have departed beings 
prophesy whether he should be rich or famous, he is not 
free. 

200. If man w^ould seek to have any one prophesy to 
him, he is not free. 

201. If it would give to man pleasure to learn the 
faults of others, he is not free. 

202. If man would judge another, he is not free. 

203. If man would seek to be influenced by the dead, 
except as an act of love, he is not free. 

204. If man would seek any joys except from his 
love, he is not free. 

205. If man would seek for the assistance of the dead 
for any selfish purpose, he is not free. 


508 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

206. If a prophecy could be made to man, and he 
would ask how and when it should take place, he is 
not free. 

207. If the same things could be prophesied to another, 
as to a man, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

208. If it would require patience in man to wait 
until any prophecy that might be made could be 
fulfilled, he is not free. 

209. If any prophecy would excite in man pride, he 
is not free. 

210. If any thing taking place, could cause man to 
think that he should be more loved than others, he is 
not free. 

211. If man would seek to give the names of the 
famous dead to the world as being his guardians, he is 
not free. 

212. If man would seek to know the name of any 
one, except as an act of love, he is not free. 

213. If man would withhold information respecting 
others, except as an act of love, he is not free. 

214. If the forms of society would prevent man from 
doing acts of love, he is not free. 

215. If man’s education would pi event him from 
doing acts of love, he is not free. 

216. If man has any habits that would prevent him 
from doing acts of love, he is not free. 

217. If the disapprobation of friends would prevent 
man from doing acts of love, he is not free. 

218. If man would seek the authority of any person, 
creed, or sect, he is not free. 

219. If man would give his assent to any belief, 
except as an act of love, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 509 

220. If man thinks any one source is more appointed 
to reveal truth than another, he is not free. 

221. If man thinks his guardians are more appointed 
to give truth than others, he is not free. 

222. If man would consult one beinsr sooner than 

O 

another for truth, he is not free. 

223. If man would ever blame any being on account 
of the casualities of life, he is not free. 

224. If man would censure any one for any thing 
that ever happened, he is not free. 

225. If man would speak or write of any being in a 
censurable manner, he is not free. 

226. If man should try to learn another a new love, 
and the person should call him hypocrite, and he would 
be annoyed, he is not free. 

22T. If man should receive insulting letters, and 
would be annoyed, he is not free. 

228. If the degraded life of any one should bring to 
man or others misery, and he would censure the person, 
he is not free. 

229. If man would censure the acts of any one, he is 
not free. 

230. If, from what man should write, he would think 
the world would see more to censure in their teachers, 
and it would give him pleasure, he is not free. 

231. If man should think what he would write would 
produce contentions, and it would give him pleasure, 
he is not free. 

232. If man would write for the purpose of telling 
the world that any belief was false, he is not free. 

233. If man would write against persons because they 
had judged him, he is not free. 


43 * 


510 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

234. If persons should revile a man’s belief in his 
presence* and he would be obliged to use self-denial to 
keep from answering them* he is not free. 

235. If in giving truth to the world, man should 
expect friends to assist, and afterwards these friends 
should scorn him* and he would be annoyed* he is not 
free. 

236. If any person teaches what man thinks to be 
truth, and he would neglect to give it to others* he is 
not free. 

237. If a man would be obliged to go to another 
country on account of his belief* and would be annoyed* 
he is not free. 

238. If a man should be denied entering any place 
on account of his belief* and would be annoyed, he is 
not free. 

239. If a man should be mobbed for his belief* and 
would be annoyed, he is not free. 

240. If a man would seek the influential in prefer¬ 
ence to the unknown to help him* he is not free. 

241. If a man would seek any one class of people in 
preference to another for assistance, he is not free. 

242. If a man would give any preferences to the rich 
because he was rich, he is not free. 

243. If a man would give any preferences to any 
class of people because he belonged with them* he is 
not free. 

244. If a man would give any preferences to those 
of his religion or nation, he is not free. 

245. If a man would give any preferences to his 
betrothed* wife, father, mother, sister, brother, or chil¬ 
dren, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 511 

246. If a man would use any selfishness in obtaining 
the consent of any one to marry him, he is not free. 

247. If a man would use any selfishness in preferring 
any thing, he is not free. 

248. If a man should be sued, and he would cease to 
love, he is not free. 

249. If a man’s friends should cease to write to him, 
and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

250. If a man’s letters should be stolen and read bv 

J 

enemies, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

251. If being engaged to be married, a man’s letters 
to his betrothed should be stolen and published to the 
world, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

252. If letters, containing important information, 
should be withheld from a person until the information 
was of no use, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

258. If any encroachment on a man’s property would 
annoy him, he is not free. 

254. If, having laborers, they should seem to be 
negligent of a man’s interest, and he would be annoyed, 
he is not free. 

255. If, having servants, they would pilfer from a 
man at every opportunity, and he would be annoyed, he 
he is not free. 

256. If, having fruit, it should be stolen from a 
man, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

257. If, having horses, they should be maimed or 
stolen, and man would be annoyed, he is not free. 

258. If, having cattle, they should die of any dis¬ 
ease, and man would be annoyed, he is not free. 

259. If, being a farmer, a man’s seed time should be 
delayed, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 


512 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

260. If, being a farmer, a man’s harvesting should be 
ruined, and he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

261. If a man’s property should be injured by his 
neighbor’s negligence, and he would be annoyed, he is 
not free. 

262. If a man’s property should be injured by ene¬ 
mies in the night, and he would be annoyed, he is not 
free. 

263. If, owning property, man should be dispossessed 
of it by a defect in the conveyance, and he would be 
annoyed, he is not free. 

264. If a man should be under the necessity of 
seeing his property foolishly squandered by others, and 
he would be annoyed, he is not free. 

265. If a man’s property should waste on account of 
sickness or misfortune, and he would be annoyed, he is 
not free. 

266. If a man would make his will, so as to tell any 
persons that he did not love them, he is not free. 

267. If a man would make his will, so that the 
reading of it by himself to the legatees would give him 
shame or annoyance, he is not free. 

268. If a man woulcl do any thing to become a lega¬ 
tee to any person’s property, he is not free. 

269. If any property could, be unjustly bequeathed 
to a man, and he would retain it from those to whom 
injustice had been done, he is not free. 

270. If a man would not give a full account of all 
property in his use, belonging to others, to persons 
authorized to receive it, he is not free. 

271. If a man would endeavor to influence anv one 
in the method of disposing of his property, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 513 

272. If, in the disposition of property, a man would 
neglect the needy who might be in his cate, he is not free. 

273 . If, while living, a man would withhold property 
from those who might be in his care, except as an act of 
love, he is not free. 

274. If a man would bequeath property, to tell the 
world that he was generous or noble, he is not free. 

275. If a man would bequeath property to give his 
name to posterity, he is not free. 

276. If a man would bequeath property for the 
promotion of any cause, in preference to needy friends 
and relatives, he is not free. 

277. If a man would give property into the hands of 
others to be given away, except to produce love, he is 
not free. 

278. If a man would be influenced in giving away 
property by the opinion of the world, he is not free. 

279. If a man would be influenced by the forms of 
society in giving away property, he is not free. 

280. If a man would give property to his preacher 
on account of the opinion of the world, he is not free. 

281. If a man would give money to support worship 
on account of the opinion of the world, he is not free. 

282. If a man would give money to the poor on 
account of the opinion of the world, he is not free. 

283. If a man would send money to foreign countries 
on account of the opinion of the world, he is not free. 

284. If a man would give money to relatives and 
friends on account of the opinion of the world, he is 
not free. 

285. If a man would use any deception respecting 
his property, he is not free. 


514 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

286. If a man would not be as faithful over the 
property of others, in his care, as over his own, he is not 
free. 

287. If, having merchandise on commission, a man 
would give to his own goods any preferences, he is 
not free. 

288. If, in selling merchandise, a man would use 
any deception, he is not free. 

289. If, in selling an article, a man would hide any 
defect it might have, he is not free. 

290. If, in business, a man would oppress any 
persons by inadequate wages, he is not free. 

291. If a man would force any class of persons to 
pay higher prices for merchandise than others, he is 
not free. 

292. If a man would take any advantage of ignorant 
persons in selling them merchandise, he is not free. 

293. If a man would try to effect the sale of mer¬ 
chandise to persons who were not in need of it, he is 
not free. 

294. If a man would be unwilling to take an article 
back when he could do so as an act of love, he is not free. 

295. If a man would have any pride in doing 
business, he is not free. 

296. If a man would do business to tell others that 
he was sharp in a bargain, he is not free. 

297. If a man would do business to tell others that 
he was a heavy operator, he is not free. 

298. If a man would have any pleasure in overcoming 
obstacles in business, he is not free. 

299. If a man would have any pleasure in keeping 
his business to himself, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


515 


300. If it would give a man pleasure to have the 
world know that he was more capable of doing business 
than others, he is not free. 

301. If a man would teach one class of persons in 
preference to another, he is not free. 

302. If a man would teach women instead of men, 
he is not free. 

303. If a man would teach the good instead of the 
degraded, he is not free. 

304. If a man would teach the learned instead of 
the simple, he is not free. 

305. If a man would do a kindness to one class of 
persons sooner than to another, he is not free. 

306. If a man would refuse to do a kindness to per¬ 
sons because they had injured him, he is not free. 

307. If a man would excuse himself from doing a 
kind act when he could do it, he is not free. 

308. If a man would ask any questions in a jesting 
manner, he is not free. 

309. If a man would speak uncourteously to any one 
who should jest about his belief, he is not free. 

310. If a man would laugh at any thing, he is not free 

311. If a man would try to excite laughter, he is not 
free. 

312. If a man would write to excite feelings of con¬ 
tempt or disgust, he is not free. 

313. If a man would seek to hear any thing ridi¬ 
culed, he is not free. 

314. If a man would go to any place to hear ridi¬ 
culed the follies of the world, he is not free. 

315. If a man would go to any place where any evil 
was ridiculed, he is not free. 


516 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

316. If a man would seek to hear any quarrelling, 
he is not free. 

317. If a man would seek to hear any contention 
about religion, he is not free. 

318. If a man would seek to read the writings of 
any person who treated human weakness or crime in a 
contemptuous or humorous manner, he is not free. 

319. If a man would read the writings of any per¬ 
sons to discover their imperfections, he is not free. 

320. If a man would read in any books or newspa¬ 
pers, except as an act of love, he is not free. 

321. If a man would seek to witness fighting between 
men or animals, he is not free. 

322 . If a man would seek any place where the selfish 
feelings were portrayed or imitated, to witness them, he 
is not free. 

323. If a man would teach virtue under assumed 
names, he is not free. 

324. If a man would teach others by showing how 
contemptible was vice, he is not free. 

325. If a man would teach others by deceptive rep¬ 
resentations, he is not free. 

326. If a man would become excited in teaching 
others, he is not free. 

327. If a man would use imperative language in 
teaching others, he is not free. 

328. If a man would try to teach truth by using 
elegant language, he is not free. 

329. If in teaching persons a man would try to excite 
their admiration and astonishment, he is not free. 

330. If in teaching persons a man would try to excite 
any feelings of solemnity or awe, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 517 

331. If in teaching persons a man would try to make 
them weep, he is not free. 

332. If in teaching others a man is not constantly 
thinking of their good, he is not free. 

333. If a man thinks any one moment in time more 
sacred than another, he is not free. 

334. If a man would excuse himself from doing an 
act of love, because he thought the hour in time was 
sacred, he is not free. 

335. If a man thinks one moment in time is appointed 
more than another to do good, he is not free. 

336. If a man thinks one day is more appointed than 
another to do any thing, he is not free. 

337. If a man thinks any one place is more sacred 
than another, he is not free. 

338. If a man thinks any class of persons are more 
set apart to do certain kinds of work than others, he is 
not free. 

339. If a man thinks that any one thing is more 
sacred than another, he is not free. 

340. If a man would do any thing to let others know 
that he could pray, he is not free. 

341. If a man thinks prayer will* do more good in 
one position than in another, he is not free. 

342 If a man thinks God wishes to be praised, he is 
is not free. 

343. If a man thinks any time should be spent except 
in being faithful, he is not free. 

344. If a man thinks he should worship God, he is 
not free. 

345. If a man thinks he can be nearer God in church 
than in his business, he is not free. 


44 


518 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

( 

346. If a man thinks that the prayers of the pure can 
take from him any wrongs, he is not free. 

347. If a man would ask God to forgive his wrongs, 
he is not free. 

348. If a man would punish any persons for their 
wrongs, he is not free. 

349. If the consequences of evil should seem to over¬ 
take any one with afflictions, and it would give a man 
pleasure, he is not free. 

350. If the miserable would excite in man feelings of 
disgust, he is not free. 

351. If a man would seek release from the care of 
the insane or idiots who were in his charge, except as 
an act of love, he is not free. 

352. If a man would seek the influence of wealth or 
position to do good, he is not free. 

353. If a man would seek poverty or martyrdom to 
do good, he is not free. 

354. If a man would seek the influence of travel or 
learning to do good, he is not free. 

355. If a man would tell his own or others’ vices to 
do good, he is not free. 

356. If a man would tell persons that God would 
punish them to do good, he is not free. 

357. If a man would tell persons that God would 
deny them joy for any thing they had done, he is not 
free. 

358. If a man would tell persons to fear God, he is 
not free. 

359. If a man would tell persons that God would 
cease to love them, he is not free. 

360. If a man thinks any other class of duties than 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 519 

those in which he is engaged are better to perfect his 
life, he is not free. 

361. If a man thinks the afflictions of the world are 
a just punishment, he is not free. 

362 . It a man would tell others how he had con¬ 
verted the wicked, he is not free. 

363 . If a man would tell others how the wicked had 
shunned his counsels, he is not free. 

364. If a man thinks God will call on him to testify 
against the wicked, he is not free. 

365. If a man would tell the world that God would 
punish the wicked, he is not free. 

366. If a man would tell the world that God has 
punished the wicked, he is not free. 

367. If a man would say that the affliction of any 
one were a punishment from God, he is not free. 

368. If a man thinks he must seek God’s mercy, he 
is not free. 

369. If a man does not endeavor to do acts of love in 
every moment of life, he is not free. 

370. If any degraded persons should need help, and 
a man would not assist them, he is not free. 

371. If a man would do any thing to tell others he 
was brave, he is not free.. 

372. If a man would do any thing to tell others that 
he was gallant or modest, he is not free. 

373. If a man would do any thing to be fashionable, 
he is not free. 

374. If a man would do any thing to excite the 
notice of others by means of dress, he is not free. 

375. If a man would contract any habits that he 
might be called eccentric, he is not free. 


520 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

376. If a man would be only affable in manner to 
those who were affable, he is not free. 

377. If a man would be annoyed at being in the 
society of well dressed persons when he was poorly 
clothed, he is not free. 

378. If a man would make any apology for his personal 
appearance, except to make others happy, he is not free. 

379. If a man would make any apology except 
as an act of love, he is not free. 

380. If a man would tell the world that he was 
courteous to the poor, he is not free. 

381. If a man would endeavor to be a pattern in 
manners for others, he is not free. 

382. If a man would dictate to others how they 
should behave, he is not free. 

383. If a man would expose his life to tell others 
that he had courage, he is not free. 

384. If a man would expose his life in any useless 
manner, he is not free. 

385. If in danger, a man would neglect any means to 
save his life, that would be an act of love, he is not free. 

386. If, having any disease, a man would neglect any 
means to restore himself to health, that would be an act 
of love, he is not free. 

387. If a man would give up his striving for any 
cause, he is not free. 

388. If a man would feel any indifference about any 
thing, he is not free. 

389. If a man would use any maxims or reflections 
to judge any one but himself, he is not free. 

390. If a man has not faith, that in every moment of 
life that love is manifested towards him, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 521 

391. If a man feels any dependence on any person, 
he is not free. 

392. If man feels any dependence on God, he is not 
free. 

393. If man feels dependent on his salary, he is not 
free. 

394. If man feels dependent on the people for any 
office, he is not free. 

395. If man would seek to be an ordained preacher, 
he, is not free. 

396. If man would seek to be called a doctor of 
divinity, he is not free. 

397. If man would prefer any position in society in 
preference to another, he is not free. 

398. If man feels that any person is superior or infer¬ 
ior to himself, he is not free. 

399. If man feels that God, Christ, or the Holy 
Ghost, is superior or inferior to himself, he is not free. 

400. If man has any fear of God, Christ, the Holy 
Ghost, the devil, heaven, or hell, he is not free. 

401. If man feels that he is superior or inferior to 
the animal, vegetable, or mineral creation, he is not free. 

402. If a man would write his own life, he is not free. 

403. If man would write the life of any person, he • 
is not free. 

404. If man would write the history of any count) y, 
creed, or sect, he is not free. 

405. If man would write a novel, he is not free. 

406. If man thinks any thing wonderful can take 
place, he is not free. 

407. If man would try to convince any one of truth 
by means of wonders, he is not free. 


u* 


522 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

408. If man would tell the world that he had 
received any tokens of greatness from the dead, he is 
not free. 

409. If a man would join any church, he is not 
free. 

410. If a man would join any organization, he is 
not free. 

411. If man would pledge himself to any resolutions, 
rules, or laws, he is not free. 

412. If man would pledge himself to abstain from 
doing any thing in the future, he is not free. 

418. If man would pledge himself to do right in 
the future, he is not free. 

414. If man supposes that God has a moral govern¬ 
ment on the earth, he is not free. 

415. If man thinks he is accountable for any thing 
he does, he is not free. 

416. If man thinks that what has been done should 
not have been done, he is not free. 

4IT. If man thinks he is superior to the drunkard, 
libertine, or harlot, he is not free. 

418. If man thinks he is superior to servants or 
slaves, he is not free. 

419. If man practices self-denial, patience, or self- 
sacrifice, he is not free. 

420. If man teaches the practice of patience, self-de¬ 
nial, or self-sacrifice, he is not free. 

421. If man would do anything in order to tell the 
world that he can speak in public assemblies, he is not 
free 

422. If man prefers one class of sounds to another, 
he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 523 

423. If man seeks to prolong the pleasures of any 
appetite, he is not free. 

424. If a man allows himself to act from any other 
motive than that of love, he is not free. 

42o. If man would expect more joy in the future 
world than in this, he is not free. 

426. If man prefers death to life, he is not free. 

427. If man prefers life to death, he is not free. 

428. If man prefers to die in one moment in time 
to another, he is not free. 

429. If man would prefer any one method of dying 
to another, he is not free. 

430. If man would prefer riches to poverty, he is not 
free. 

431. If man would prefer poverty to riches, he is not 
free. 

432. If man would prefer fame to obscurity, he is not 
free. 

433: If man would prefer obscurity to fame, he is not 
free. 

434. If man would prefer a good reputation to a bad 
one, he is not free. 

435. If man would prefer the respect of society to 
being called a traitor, he is not free. 

436. If man would prefer being called a traitor to 
being called good, he is not free. 

437. If man would bestow any praise on the famous 
dead, he is not free. 

438. If man would bestow any praise on orators or- 
public speakers, he is not free. 

439. If man would go to hear any one speak on 
account of their pleasing address, he is not free. 


524 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

440. If man would seek to celebrate the anniversary 
of any past event, he is not free. 

441. If man would seek to make any event of tlie 
past more important than another, he is not free. 

442. If man would seek to decide any quarrels by 
precedents or legislative enactments, he is not free. 

443. If man would seek to organize any society, he 
is not free. 

444. If man supposes he is not protected in every 
moment of his life, he is not free. 

445. If any public speaker can excite in man any 
enthusiasm, he is not free. 

446. If any public speaker can excite in man any 
more sympathy for one class of people than another, he is 
not free. 

447. If any^ublic speaker can excite in man any 
feelings of awe or solemnity, he is not free. 

448. If any public speaker can excite in man any 
feelings of dislike or hatred towards any class of people, 
he is not free. 

449. If any public speaker can excite in man fears 
respecting any future condition, he is not free. 

450. If any public speaker or writings can excite in 
man any anticipations of future bliss, he is not free. 

451. If man prefers heaven to hell, he is not free. 

452. If man prefers hell to heaven, he is not free. 

453. If any public speaker, writings, or any 
one, can influence man to do any thing different 
from what he perceives to be an act of love, he is 
not free. 

454. If man feels anymore pleasure in hearing music 
or singing than any other sounds, he is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


525 


455. If man feels any more pleasure in the society of 
ladies than in that of others, he is not free. 

456. If man feels any more pleasure in the society of 
those who love, than with those who hate him, he is not 
free. 

457. If man would seek pleasure in the indulgence 
of any appetite, he is not free. 

458. If man has any anxiety whether he shall live in 
the next moment of time, he is not free. 

459. If man has any anxiety whether he shall retain 
any thing he now possesses in the next moment of time, 
he is not free. 

460. If man has any anxiety about what any person 
shall do in the future, he is not free. 

461. If man has any anxiety about any obligations 
which others are under to him, he is not free. 

462. If man would have any anxiety about any 
obligations which he was under to others, he is not free. 

463. If man has any anxiety whether any particular 
persons shall live in the next moment of time, he is 
not free. 

464. If man has any anxiety whether all existences, 
here or in the future world, shall cease to live in the 
next moment of time, he is not free. 

465. If a man has any anxiety whether any of his 
friends shall go to heaven or hell, he is not free. 

466. If man anticipates a future state of bliss, he is 
not free. 

467. If man would teach there is a future state of 
bliss, he is not free. 

468. If man would teach that all men will be saved, 
he is not free. 


526 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


469. If man would teach that any beings are exposed 
to any future calamity, he is not free. 

470. If man would try to do as God wished, he is 
not free. 

471. If man would try to do as Christ wished, he is 
not free. 

472. If man would try to do as the angels or seraphs 
wished, he is not free. 

473. If man would try to do as the ancient dead 
wished, he is not free. 

474. If man would try to do as the devil wished, 
he is not free. 

475. If man would try to pattern after the virtues of 
any being, he is not free. 

476. If man would try to pattern after the vices of 
any person, he is not free. 

477. If man would teach others to consult God, 
Christ, preachers, or any one for truth, he is not free. 

478 If man supposes that any one has more truth 
than himself, he is not free. 

479. If man supposes that he has more truth than 
any one else, he is not free. 

480. If man has any fears of Christ, Satan, or 
Mohammed, he is not free. 

481. If man has any fears of any thing that he has 

or can have a conception of in the universe, he is not 
free. / 

482. If man has any anxiety whether he shall be 
loved or disliked by any persons, he is not free. 

483. If man has any anxiety whether he shall be 
loved or disliked by all beings that ever have or will 
exist, he is not free. 










OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDO M . 527 

484. If man would teach that people are accountable 
beings, he is not free. 

485. If man supposes he is a moral agent, he is not free. 

486. If a man supposes he is a free agent, he is not 
free. 

487. If a man prefers any one government to that of 
another, he is not free. 

488. If man prefers any one organization of men to 
that of another, he is not free. 

489. If man prefers churches to houses of ill fame, 
he is not free. 

490. If man prefers the society of God to that of the 
devil, he is not free. 

491. If man prefers the society of Christ to that of 
Judas Iscariot, he is not free. 

492. If man prefers the society of the devil to that 
of Christ, God, or angels, he is not free. 

493. If man prefers living in the future world to 
living in this, he is not free. 

494. If a man prefers living in this world to living 
in the future, he is not free. 

495. If man prefers being married to being unmar¬ 
ried, he is not free. 

496. If man prefers to be unmarried to being mar¬ 
ried, he is not free. 

497. If man feels any preferences for any position or 
condition, he is not free. 

498. If man would learn to sing, he is not free. 

499. If man would learn to play on any instrument, 
he is not free. 

500. If man would be annoyed at hearing any music, 
he is not tree. 


528 OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 

501. If man could hear any sounds that would annoy 
him, he is not free. 

502. If music would excite in man any enthusiasm, 
he is not free. 

503. If man supposes that any unnecessary action can 
take place, he is not free. 

504. If man supposes one action is more necessary 
than another, he is not free. 

505. If man would speak in a satirical manner of 
any person or thing, he is not free. 

506. If man would speak disrespectfully of any being 
or thing, he is not free. 

507. If man would try to excite prejudices against 
any being or thing, he is not free. 

508. If man does not love preachers, and doctors of 
divinity, he is not free. 

509. If man does not love God and the devil, he is 
not free. 

510. If man does not love church members and har¬ 
lots, he is not free. 

511. If man does not love lawyers and doctors of 
laws, he is not free. 

512. If a man does not love judges and governors, 
he is not free. 

513. If man does not love scientific men and pro¬ 
fessors, he is not free. 

514. If man does not love captains and generals, he 
is not free. 

515. If man does not love the rich and poor, he is 
not free. 

516. If man does not love beggars and drunkards, he 
is not free. 


OBSTRUCTIONS TO FREEDOM. 


529 


517. If man. does not love slaves and slave owners, 
he is not free. 

518. If man does not love Indians and Negroes, he 
is not free. 

519. If man does not love infidels and blasphemers, 
he is not free. 

520. If man does not love the beautiful and the 
deformed, he is not free. 

521. If man does not love the proud and the lowly, 
he is not free. 

522. If man does not love the fanatical and the sim¬ 
ple, he is not free. 

523. If man does not love traitors and bigots, he is 
not free. 

524. If man does not love the defamers of his charac¬ 
ter, he is not free. 

525. If man does not love seers and statesmen, he is 
not free. 

526. If man does not love the fashionable and the 
eccentric, he is not free. 

527. If man does not love all of every name and in 
every world, he is not free. 

528 If man does not feel in every moment of time, 
that every thing that has taken place, should have taken 
place, he is not free. 

529. If man does not feel in every moment of time, 
that every thing that is to be, ought and should be, he 
is not free. 

530. If man does not see in one as much as in 
another, a brother or sister, he is not free. 


45 


530 


THE FREE. 


ARTICLE CCXLIX. 

THE FREE. 

Can man be free among the righteous and among 
the damned ? 

Can man be free among the pure and among the 
degraded ? 

Can man be free in the highest and in the lowest sphere? 

Can man be free in the churches and in the play-houses ? 

Can man be free among the naked and among the 
clothed ? 

Can man be free where they shout praises and where 
they curse God ? 

Can man be free in heaven and in hell ? 

Can man be free on the earth and in the future world ? 

Can man be free among angels and among reptiles ? 

Can man be free in the presence of Christ and in the 
presence of Judas Iscariot ? 

Can man be free in the presence of the proud and of 
the lowly ? 

Can man be free in the presence of bigots and of the 
meek ? 

Can man be free in the presence of the assassin and 
of the one who loves ? 

Can man be free among those of lofty positions and 
among beggars ? 

Can man be free in the city and in the forest ? 

Can man be free in the midst of flowers and of thorns ? 

Can man be free among the beautiful and the deformed ? 

Can man be free in the shout of joy and the cry of 
distress ? 


THE FREE. 


531 


Can man be free when he is defamed and when praised? 

Can man be free in the presence of God and of Satan ? 

Can man be free when he is drowning in the sea and 
■when he is walking in the street ? 

Can man be free when pierced with daggers and 
when resting on his couch ? 

Can man be free when the earth shakes and in the 
refreshing breeze ? 

Can man be free amidst the groans of the dying and 
the music of choirs ? 

Can man be free amidst the destruction of worlds 
and on a pleasant morning in summer ? 

Has man faith in love ? — in doing acts of love ? — 
that every thing that takes place is a manifestation of 
love ? 

Has man faith in that strength of purity that does not 
practice self-denial, as being joy ? 

Has man faith in loving and toiling for his enemies, 
as being joy ? 

Has man faith in being kind to the degraded when he 
sees no prospect of doing them good, as being joy ? 

Has man faith in toiling for his conceptions of truth, 
as being joy ? 

Has man faith, if it is required, that he shall never be 
released from burthens, that it is a manifestation of love? 

Has man faith that thinking over his selfishness is joy ? 

Has man faith that every condition in which he is 
placed is a manifestation of love ? 

Has man faith in being faithful over every thing, 
whether belonging to himself or another, as being joy ? 

Has man faith in being always truthful in speech, as 
being joy ? 


532 


THE FREE. 


Has man faith in seeking to be faithful over the 
things in the present moment of existence, as being 

j°y ? 

Has man faith, if all his possessions should be taken 
away, that it is a manifestation of love ? 

Has man faith, that if all his friends shall be removed 
by death, that it is a manifestation of love ? 

Has man faith in loving the infirm, children, the 
beautiful, the ugly, the deformed, the drunkard, the 
liquor dealer, the servant, the slave, the murderer, the 
slave master, the harlot, and all of every name, as being 

j°y ? 

If man is pure; if there is no enemy he toils for but 
he loves; if he is not subject to fits of impatience; if 
he is not under the necessity of practising self-denial; 
if he sees no one as superior or inferior to himself; if 
he sees all as his brothers and sisters; if he sees all as 
equally cared for; if he does not feel dependent on any 
being; if he has faith that all the events of life are a 
manifestation of love, he is free, and nothing can inter¬ 
rupt his joy. 

Man can go to no place as an act of love, but his own 
home will go with him ; for he will then feel that his 
own home is wherever he is, and in every condition in 
which he can be placed in all periods of time. 

Freedom is innocence that cannot be corrupted; for 
none will go from joy to misery. 

Freedom is purity that can not be tempted; for none 
will go from joy to misery. 

Existence to the free is joy; for none will go from 
joy to misery. 






Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: April 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724) 779-2111 















































































